The social nature of disability, disease and genetics: A response to Gillam, Persson, Holtug, Draper and Chadwick

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 172-175

  Newell, Christopher ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

Deaf culture; Disability; Reproductive technology; Social

Indexed keywords

DISABLED PERSON; FEMALE; GENE THERAPY; GENETIC DISORDER; GENETIC ENHANCEMENT; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION; HEALTH; HUMAN; MEDICAL ETHICS; MENTAL STRESS; NOTE; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; SOCIOECONOMICS;

GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION;

DISABLED PERSONS; ETHICS, MEDICAL; FEMALE; GENE THERAPY; GENETIC DISEASES, INBORN; GENETIC ENHANCEMENT; HEALTH; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; PREIMPLANTATION DIAGNOSIS; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; SOCIAL VALUES; STRESS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; VALUE OF LIFE;

EID: 0033110240     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jme.25.2.172     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Newell C. A critique of the construction of prenatal diagnosis and disability. In: McKie J ed. Ethical issues in prenatal diagnosis and the termination of pregnancy. Alelbourne: Centre for Human Bioethics, Monash University, 1994: 89-96.
2. Abberley P. The concept of oppression and the development of a social theory of disability. Disability, Handicap and Society 1987;2:5-20.
3. National Health and Medical Research Council. Discussion paper. The ethics of limiting life-sustaining treatment. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council, 1988: 5.
4. Newell C. A critical evaluation of the NH&MRC's 77! ethics of limiting life-sustaining treatment and related perspectives on the bioethics of disability. Australian Disability Review 1991;4:4657.
5. Davis A. From u-here I sit. London: Triangle, 1989: 19.
6. Davis A. Yes, the baby should live. Neui Scientist 1985;31:54.
7. See for example Fulcher G. Disabling policies? London: Falmer Press, 1989.
8. Bowe F. Rehabilitating America. New York: Harper and Row, 1980.
9. For a review of some literature in the history and philosophy of science regarding "rejected knowledge", see for example: Richards E. Vitamin C and cancer. London: MacMillan, 1991;New-ell C. The social construction of the Kheekhair and cochlear implant: a study of the definition and regulation of disability. Unpublished PhD thesis. Victoria: Faculty of Arts, Deakin University, 1994; Wallis R, ed. On the margins of science: the soda! construction of rejected knowledge. Keele, Staffordshire: University of Keele, 1979.
10. For a discussion of the powerful dynamics of narrative see: Newell C. The ethics of narrative ethics. Health Care Analysis 1998;6:171-4.
11. Newell C. Superhumans a super headache? Yes. The Australian 1998 March 12: 11.
12. For a discussion of deaf culture see: Groce NE. Everyone here spoke sign language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985; Newell CJ. The ethics of the cochlear implant. Australian Bioethics Association 1992, Annual Conference Proceedings, vol 1. Sydney: Australian Bioethics Association, 1982; Padden C, Humphries T. Deaf in America: voices from a culture. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988. Whilst I draw upon literature documenting the Australian, UK and USA deaf cultures, the material referred to can be seen to apply to each distinct culture, as the socio-linguistic analysis extends across cultures.
13. Johnson Ai. Aborting defective foetuses - what will it do? Link Disability Journal 1990 Aug/Sept: 14.