The ambiguous nature of epigenetic responsibility

Abstract

Over the past decade, epigenetic studies have been providing further evidence of the molecular interplay between gene expression and its health outcomes on one hand, and the physical and social environments in which individuals are conceived, born and live on the other. As knowledge of epigenetic programming expands, a growing body of literature in social sciences and humanities is exploring the implications of this new field of study for contemporary societies. Epigenetics has been mobilised to support political claims, for instance, with regard to collective obligations to address socio-environmental determinants of health. The idea of a moral 'epigenetic responsibility' has been proposed, meaning that individuals and/or governments should be accountable for the epigenetic programming of children and/or citizens. However, these discussions have largely overlooked important biological nuances and ambiguities inherent in the field of epigenetics. In this paper, we argue that the identification and assignment of moral epigenetic responsibilities should reflect the rich diversity and complexity of epigenetic mechanisms, and not rely solely on a gross comparison between epigenetics and genetics. More specifically, we explore how further investigation of the ambiguous notions of epigenetic normality and epigenetic plasticity should play a role in shaping this emerging debate.

Gendered imaginaries: situating knowledge of epigenetic programming of health

“…4 As shown above, a For an analysis of the mutual shaping between moral exercises of individual responsibility for health and epigenetic research, see: Chiapperino and Testa (2016). For a normative critique of claims of epigenetic responsibility, see: Chadwick and O'Connor (2013), Dupras and Ravitsky (2016), Hedlund (2011) .shared urge can be found (among many of our interviewees) to avoid further igniting public health surveillance on the body of the mother.…”

“… For an analysis of the mutual shaping between moral exercises of individual responsibility for health and epigenetic research, see: Chiapperino and Testa (). For a normative critique of claims of epigenetic responsibility, see: Chadwick and O'Connor (), Dupras and Ravitsky (), Hedlund () . …”

“…For a critique of the power of scientific representations to naturalize social conventions about gender, see instead: Martin (1991 Chiapperino and Testa (2016). For a normative critique of claims of epigenetic responsibility, see: Chadwick and O'Connor (2013), Dupras and Ravitsky (2016), Hedlund (2011) . 4 As shown above, a For an analysis of the mutual shaping between moral exercises of individual responsibility for health and epigenetic research, see: Chiapperino and Testa (2016).…”

The many meanings of autism: conceptual and ethical reflections

“…Hence, Lock states nature and nurture are to be conceived of as thoroughly entangled, an idea that moves us beyond mere gene–environment interactions. Dupras and Ravitsky call for an approach that gives closer attention to the difficulty of defining what constitutes epigenetic normality and plasticity, and how the idea that certain epigenetic modifications leading to disorders may suggest a mismatch between individual and a specific environment, rather than an abnormality per se . As such, epigenetics seems to be a vindication of the thoughts of French medical doctor and philosopher Canguilhem, who considered organisms to be in constant dynamic interaction with the environment.…”

“…Dupras and Ravitsky call for an approach that gives closer attention to the difficulty of defining what constitutes epigenetic normality and plasticity, and how the idea that certain epigenetic modifications leading to disorders may suggest a mismatch between individual and a specific environment, rather than an abnormality per se. 46 As such, epigenetics seems to be a vindication of the thoughts of French medical doctor and philosopher Canguilhem, who considered organisms to be in constant dynamic interaction with the environment. A pathology is a state that is experienced by the organism as negative biological experiences; it is not solely located in the individual, but arises through the mismatch between individual and environment.…”