How Experience Confronts Ethics

Hoffmaster, Barry; Hooker, C. A.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01709.x

Cited by 32 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Without an acknowledgment of these, it is possible that a misplaced confidence is invested in reviews as currently conceived and that alternative policy possibilities are not sought out. Like other complex social and scientific issues, arguably it would not be wholly unfair with respect to the topic of this article to contend that “not only is the solution unknown, but the problem itself is initially not well defined, and the values that ought to drive its investigation and the valid methods to do so are unknown, unclear, or in dispute, as are the set of applicable theoretical models, the solution set, and the criteria for successful resolution” (124). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why has Not There been More Research of Concern?

Rappert¹

2014

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amid the renewed concern in the last several years about the potential for life science research to facilitate the spread of disease, a central plank of the policy response has been to enact processes for assessing the risks and benefits of “research of concern.” The recent controversy regarding a proposed redaction of work on the modification of a H5N1 avian influenza virus is perhaps the most prominent such instance. And yet, a noteworthy feature of this case is its exceptionalness. In the last 10 years, life science publishers, funders, and labs have rarely identified any research as “of concern,” let alone proposed censors. This article takes this experience with risk assessment as an invitation for reflection. Reasons for the low number of instances of concern are related to how the biosecurity dimensions of the life sciences are identified, how they are described, how the assessments of benefits and risks are undertaken, how value considerations do and do not enter into assessments, as well as the lack of information on the outcomes of reviews. This argument builds on such considerations to examine the limitations and implications of the risk–benefit experiment of concern framing, the politics of expertise as well as the prospects for alternative responses.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why has Not There been More Research of Concern?

Rappert¹

2014

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They need not necessarily function as decision rules, analogous to standard operating procedures, from which to derive a standard response in well‐defined conditions. Striking a reasonable balance between competing concerns may require sensitivity to the specific context of the decision . Accordingly, decision‐makers should perhaps be allowed sufficient leeway for judgments on what the circumstances require.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An inventory of concerns behind blood safety policies in five Western countries

Kramer

Verweij

Zaaijer³

2015

Transfusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…27, p. 12; ref. 28, ref. 29) There is wide diversity within social science study reports in our study with respect to the strength and type of recommendations authors feel comfortable promoting regarding ethical, legal, social, or policy issues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Charting ELSI’s future course: lessons from the recent past

Walker

Morrissey

2012

Genetics in Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose We sought to examine the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) literature research and scholarship types, topics, and contributing community fields of training as a first step to charting the broader ELSI community’s future priorities and goals. Methods We categorized 642 articles and book chapters meeting inclusion criteria for content in both human genetics or genomics and ethics or ELSI during a 5-year period (2003–2008) according to research and scholarship types, topics, and the area of advanced training of the first-listed author. Research and scholarship type categories were developed and characterized through in-depth review of 95 randomly sampled publications from the larger group. Results There is a single dominant approach to ELSI, which focuses on ethical and other social issues “downstream” of advances in genomics, the contributors to which predominately have advanced training in medicine or science fields other than social science. A comparatively low percentage of publications primarily offer policy recommendations, and these are much more likely to be written by those with advanced training in law than is the case for the literature as a whole. Social science studies predominately employ qualitative methods and vary significantly with respect to the extent and types of recommendations offered. Two further types of ELSI research and scholarship offer alternative models for so-called “normative” work in this field. Conclusion Considering topics, training, and types of ELSI research and scholarship from the most recent past allows for a baseline perspective that is sorely needed in charting this field’s future course.

show abstract

How Experience Confronts Ethics

Cited by 32 publications

References 0 publications

Why has Not There been More Research of Concern?

Why has Not There been More Research of Concern?

An inventory of concerns behind blood safety policies in five Western countries

Charting ELSI’s future course: lessons from the recent past

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About