I find aspects of that article a little all over the place. For one thing the current genetic testing surely means that the primary way of dealing with genetic illnesses is through abortion which for many people for various reasons might not be the route they want to go. CRISPR would simply provide an alternative.
I’m also not sure why he discusses genetic enhancement in the context of three parents children as this was specifically developed to assist babies who would otherwise be born with malfunctioning mitochondria, otherwise there’s nothing that different from having the child born “naturally”.
I would agree that there’s a degree of social inequality that could be exacerbated by the technology however just like Im_On_Safari suggested up above ultimately this is far less effective than the selection bias that is already in place in our current society (and societies all over the world).