Strong Public Support for Treatment and Research Using Fetal Tissue, Particularly Among Those Accepting the Scientific World-View

Evans, Mdr; Zanjani, Esmail D.; Kelley, Jonathan

doi:10.1089/15258160260194866

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The socio-demographic factors are, for the most part, not statistically signifi cant, as has also been found in previous studies of other bioethical attitudes such as view on the morality of stem cell research [37] and research using different questions on attitudes towards abortion [9,34] . The only systematically signifi cant socio-demographic variable is sex, with men being 6-9 points out of 100 more favourable than women towards all aspects of GLGT.…”

Section: Social Differences In Attitudes Towards Glgt and Abortionsupporting

confidence: 56%

“…For example, in the case of using fetal stem cells, public attitudes focus on the morality of the procedure per se and are only weakly infl uenced by the seriousness of the condition being treated [37] , so the seriousness gradient discovered here cannot be taken for granted for other conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Strategically, for a test site it is reasonable to seek a country that is not extreme on religionneither as devout as the USA and Ireland, nor so thoroughly secularized as the former East Germany or Hungary [29] -nor extreme on abortion. Accordingly, Australia seemed a good candidate, being middle of the road in religiosity [36] and in attitudes towards abortion [37] . Pragmatically, we had the opportunity of including the relevant questions on Australia's principal academic social survey.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To explore social differences in attitudes towards GLGT and abortion in these various circumstances, we turn to regression analysis, including as predictors an array of variables that have been shown to be important infl uences on other bioethical attitudes, notably the scientifi c worldview, religious denomination, and church attendance [37] , together with some standard socio-demographic controls and some measures of scientifi c knowledge ( table 4 ). Table 4 presents metric regression coeffi cients which show the gain or loss in points out of 100 in acceptability of different kinds of GLGT or abortion for a one-unit change in the predictor variable.…”

Section: Social Differences In Attitudes Towards Glgt and Abortionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Ethics of Gene Therapy and Abortion: Public Opinion

2005

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the grounds that the public should be consulted in decisions concerning the legitimate scope of germ-line genetic therapy (GLGT), survey data on the ethics of GLGT were collected from a large (n = 1,403) representative national sample of Australians in 2002. The data show that opinion is quite divided over GLGT in the case of a ‘death sentence’ genetic defect: 36% would forbid it, 23% have mixed feelings and 41% would allow it. For less serious conditions there is more opposition to GLGT. Thus, 48% would forbid GLGT to remedy a minor physical defect and 52% would oppose GLGT to counteract a propensity to violence, but fully 73% would disallow GLGT for cosmetic reasons. The data also show that opposition to abortion is lower than opposition to GLGT in the case of a ‘death sentence’ genetic defect, but at about the same level as, or greater than, opposition to GLGT for less serious issues. The questions show good measurement properties, including low missing data rates, so they are likely to provide an accurate picture of the public’s views on the ethics of GLGT. It is suggested that a system for monitoring public opinion on these issues be developed.

show abstract

Section: Social Differences In Attitudes Towards Glgt and Abortionsupporting

confidence: 56%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Social Differences In Attitudes Towards Glgt and Abortionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Ethics of Gene Therapy and Abortion: Public Opinion

2005

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent empirical research has found however, that religious beliefs may not be as important in the formation of public support for stem cell research as the media debate would suggest. Although peer reviewed research examining the underlying reasons for public approval of stem cell research is scant, there is some evidence that opposition is dependent upon the context of the research, and the level of trust in scientists, as well as religious beliefs (Critchley and Turney, 2004;Evans et al, 2002). This research attempts to further explore whether or not approval of stem cell research is contingent upon where the research is being conducted, who is conducting the research and why.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public opinion and trust in scientists: the role of the research context, and the perceived motivation of stem cell researchers

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examined why the public may be less supportive of stem cell research when conducted in a private compared to public research context. A representative sample (n = 403) of Australians who were exposed to information relating to privately funded scientists were significantly less likely to approve of stem cell research than those who were presented with a scenario of scientists working within a publicly funded University (n = 401) and a control condition (n = 404). Mediation analyses revealed that the decrease in approval was primarily associated with the tendency of privately funded scientists to be trusted less than their publicly funded counterparts. Public trust in University scientists was also found to be higher than that of private scientists because publicly funded scientists were perceived to be motivated more by benevolence, and more likely to produce benefits that will be accessible to the public. While private scientists were perceived to be more self interested than public scientists, perceived self interest did not explain the decrease in trust. There were also no significant differences across research contexts for the perceived competence of scientists or the likelihood that stem cell research would result in cures for diseases. The implications of these results are discussed in relation to the possible decrease in public trust that may occur alongside the increasing privatization of academic enquiry, and particularly controversial scientific research.

show abstract