| |
Basic InformationMore InformationLatest NewsMany Young Adults Misusing Medical Marijuana, Study SuggestsAnother Possible Effect of Climate Change: More Preemie Babies1 in 18 U.S. Teens Carries a Gun to School: StudyU.S. Poison Centers Field More Calls About Psychoactive Substances: StudyDoctors' Group Calls for Ban on Most Vaping ProductsAs Disease Outbreaks Tied to 'Anti-Vaxxers' Rise, States Take ActionAHA News: Millions Who Never Smoked Cigarettes Are Using Other Tobacco ProductsMost Docs Don't Know Hair Care Is a Barrier to Exercise for Black WomenHealth Tip: Do's and Don'ts for Calling 911Climate Change Will Hurt Kids Most, Report WarnsYou Won't Get Sued If You Do CPR, Review SuggestsRacial Bias Seen in Heart TransplantsTrump Administration Wants to Raise Age to Buy E-Cigs to 21Juul Stops Sales of Mint-Flavored E-CigarettesDo You Take Biotin Supplements? They Could Affect Your Medical TestsClimate Change a 'Threat to Human Well-Being,' Scientists SayAnti-Vaxxers Find Ways Around States' 'Personal Exemption' BansMedia Reports on Celeb Suicides Could Trigger CopycatsStill Way Too Much Smoking in Movies Aimed at KidsConsumers' Orders Changed Slightly After Calorie Counts Added to MenusReport Finds Americans' Health Is FlaggingAfter Mass Shootings, Docs Even Less Likely to Mention Gun SafetyBan on Sale of Sugary Drinks Trimmed Employees' WaistlinesAre You Accessing All Your Medical Records Online?Independent Pharmacies Are Closing Down Across the U.S.Language Barriers May Mean Repeat Visits to the HospitalInterest in CBD Products Keeps Soaring, but Health Experts WaryJuul Halts Sale of Fruit, Dessert Flavors of E-CigarettesShrinking Youth Group Aids Global Decline in HomicidesWhen Meds Are Free, Patients Take Them More OftenSpurred by Mass Shootings, More Americans View Mentally Ill as ViolentPacemakers, Insulin Pumps Could Be Hacking Targets: FDAAHA News: Make Neighborhoods Green for Heart Health? The Idea Is Taking RootPoll Finds Many Young Americans Think Vaping is SafeWhat Do Hospital Cyber Attackers Want to Know About You?U.S. Minorities' Recent Health Gains May Be SlowingPaid Family Leave Helps Keep Babies' Vaccines on Track: StudyDon't Let Fear of Cancer Keep You From Doctor VisitsMaker Halts Distribution of Generic Zantac Due to Possible CarcinogenCould Profit Be a Factor in Kidney Transplant Decisions?Get Up-to-the-Minute Safety Alerts Sent Straight to Your InboxPurdue Pharma to Settle Opioid Crisis Lawsuits, May Pay Up to $12 BillionWould a Health Warning on Every Cigarette Help Smokers Quit?Docs Prescribe More Opioids at Certain Time of DayFDA Warns Juul About Illegal Marketing Claims and Pitch to YouthComing Soon: A 'Pot Breathalyzer'?More CT, MRI Scans Being Used, Despite Calls to Cut BackCancer Overtakes Heart Disease as #1 Killer of Middle-Aged in Wealthy NationsOxyContin Maker Purdue Offering Up to $12 Billion to Settle Opioid ClaimsThousands of Kidneys Thrown Away by U.S. Transplant Centers Questions and AnswersVideosLinksBook Reviews |
| |
by Anders Nordgren Kluwer Academic, 2001 Review by Arantza Etxeberria, Ph.D. on Mar 20th 2003 
The main
question of this book is whether scientists --in this case, geneticists- hold
moral responsibility for the consequences of their research. And the answer is
yes. In the front of the book stands a quote by Bertrand Russell: It is
impossible in the world for a man of science to say with any honesty, 'My
business is to provide knowledge, and what use is made of the knowledge is not
my responsibility' . Yet, unfortunately, scientists often take refuge in the
belief that pure learning is value-free and independent of practical
consequences, and prefer to leave those to be dealt by other instances, social
or institutional.
This book,
written after the Human Genome Project is virtually complete, elaborates at
length this issue of research responsibility, which is denounced to have been
"neglected" by the ELSI (officially in charge of discussing all
ethical issues raised by the HGP). The author takes upon him the task of
carefully making explicit what kind of responsibilities should geneticists
assume, and it starts with two initial chapters aiming to ground ideas on how
to think about what moral responsibility imports in general, and for those
involved with science.
The view
defended is that, in order to know what is ethical, it is better to abandon the
path of searching for foundations or principles, and assume empirical results
showing how moral ideas arise from the metaphors that help us think in the given
situations. Thus, moral issues can be posed and thought about in the frame of
an "imaginative casuistry", so that what happened in similar
situations serves to make decisions, given the apropriate adjustments:
"moral reasoning is a matter of imagination". Although principles are
not completely rejected, the idea is that, instead of deducing courses of
action from them, one should be able to imagine possible consequences of the
one's acts using prototype cases as examples.
In what respects
scientists, the author considers two different perspectives for moral
responsibility, the internal one of those doing science, which concerns with
those issues that have to do with scientific "good" practice
(misconduct, treatment of human subjects), and the external one, related to all
kinds of possible social consequences. Both are important, and all
considerations developed in these two chapters can boil down into some concrete
specifications about how to proceed: What should responsible scientists do? My
general proposals to these scientists -as individuals and as a community-- are
as follows: 1) Use your moral imagination to envision different ethically
relevant consequences of research, and to figure out different ways of taking
responsibility for these consequences. 2) Learn from history, i.e. from
earlier, prototypical cases. 3) Participate in dialogue with the general
public, politicians and industrialists. 4) Integrate ethical reflection with
scientific practice by choosing an appropriate form of responsibility, i.e.
adequate means of implementing the content of responsibility at different
social levels. (p. 84)
The rest of the
book follows by considering the case at hand, the HGP (chapter 3), and by
applying the general framework previously exposed to several possible
consequences or applications derived from the sequencing of the human genome
(chapters 4, 5, 6). One is "gene hunting", specially with the aim of
producing genetically tailored drugs: the author analyses several possible
scenarios in which the practice of searching for certain genes can encounter
moral conflict, especially in what concerns of privacy or property. Another is
possible genetic modifications, namely gene therapies, germline modification
and the use of animals in research. And the last one is the possible
consequences for human reproduction, in reprogenetic medicine.
Each argument of
this book is exposed in a detailed and thorough mode. Its ideas are interesting
and have been developed with knowledge and courage, yet the book is not an easy
read. The reader who is familiar with the topic will find here more profound
discussions than those usual in the literature, both in the detail in which
they are exposed and in the scope of the matters considered; for starters or
readers with a mild curiosity, the book might be too demanding.
© 2003 Arantza Etxeberria
Arantza
Etxeberria, Ph.D., Dept. of Logic and Philosophy of Science, University of
the Basque Country, San Sebastian, Spain. |