Geneticization and bioethics: advancing debate and research.
In the present paper, we focus on the role that the concept of geneticization has played in the discussion about health care, bioethics and society. The concept is discussed and examples from the evolving discourse about geneticization are critically analyzed. The relationship between geneticization, medicalization and biomedicalization is described, emphasizing how debates about the latter concepts can inspire future research on geneticization. It is shown how recurrent themes from the media coverage of genetics portray typical traits of geneticization and thus contribute to the process. We look at examples of small-scale studies from the literature where geneticization of medical practice has been demonstrated. Methodological disputes about the relevance of empirical evidence for the geneticization thesis and the normative status of the concept are discussed. We consider arguments to the effect that ideas from mainstream bioethics have facilitated geneticization by emphasizing individualistic notions of autonomy and responsibility while ignoring the role of genetics in the wider social context. It is shown how a concept like geneticization, which can be used to draw the attention of philosophers, social scientists and others to challenges that tend to be neglected by mainstream bioethics, also has the potential to move people's attention away from other pertinent issues. This may happen if researchers become preoccupied with the transformative effects of genetics, and we argue that a wider reading of geneticization should inspire critical analysis of the sociocultural preconditions under which genetics is currently evolving.
Arnason
Vilhjálmur
V
Department of Philosophy & Centre for Ethics, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland. vilhjarn@hi.is
Hjörleifsson
Stefán
S
D001709:Biotechnology / Q000941:ethics*; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005818:Genetic Engineering / Q000941:ethics*; D006801:Humans; D008402:Mass Media; D010686:Philosophy, Medical
Health Care Anal. 2003 Mar;11(1):3-13
14510305
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Mar;62(5):1278-90
16174544
Cult Med Psychiatry. 2001 Jun;25(2):225-47
11453260
Sociol Health Illn. 2005 Nov;27(7):873-96
16313521
Soc Sci Med. 2006 May;62(10):2373-85
16377046
Med Health Care Philos. 2001;4(1):47-51
11315419
Soc Sci Med. 2005 Jun;60(12):2673-83
15820579
Med Health Care Philos. 1998;1(3):217-24
11081296
Med Health Care Philos. 2002;5(1):53-63
11954994
Soc Sci Med. 1996 Jun;42(12):1609-20
8783424
Theor Med Bioeth. 2003;24(3):199-214
12948046
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004 Nov;58(11):894-9
15483303
CMAJ. 2004 Apr 27;170(9):1399-407
15111473
Soc Sci Med. 2005 Jan;60(1):109-18
15482871
J Med Philos. 1998 Jun;23(3):274-87
9736189
Med Health Care Philos. 1998;1(3):235-43
11081298
Soc Sci Med. 2001 Apr;52(8):1255-68
11281408
Med Health Care Philos. 2004;7(1):71-9
15139256
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2005 Summer;14(3):322-8
16028546
Med Health Care Philos. 2001;4(3):295-304
11760229
Med Health Care Philos. 2002;5(1):65-71
11954995
Am J Law Med. 1991;17(1-2):15-50
1877608
Soc Sci Med. 2003 May;56(10 ):2045-57
12697196
JAMA. 2001 Nov 14;286(18):2322-4
11710899
PLoS Med. 2006 Oct;3(10):e419
17076555
Med Health Care Philos. 2004;7(1):81-3; discussion 89-91
15139257
Med Health Care Philos. 2004;7(1):55-69
15139255
Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Apr;62(4):979-84
9529342
Med Health Care Philos. 2001;4(3):305-9
11760230
J Hist Behav Sci. 2003 Spring;39(2):115-29
12720322
Sci Cult (Lond). 2002 Dec;11(4):429-57
15971366
N Engl J Med. 2000 Jul 13;343(2):141-4
10891526