Furthering injustices against women: Genetic information, moral obligations, and gender

Bioethics

Volumn 20, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 301-307

  De Melo Martín, Inmaculada ^a  

^a WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Autonomy; Duty to disclose; Duty to future people; Genetic information; Genetic testing; Women

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; DISEASE TRANSMISSION; FAMILY; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENETIC DISORDER; GENETIC RISK; HETEROZYGOTE; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; JUSTICE; MEDICAL ETHICS; MORALITY; PREGNANCY; RESPONSIBILITY; REVIEW; SEX DIFFERENCE; WOMEN'S RIGHTS;

EID: 33749531591     PISSN: 02699702     EISSN: 14678519     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2006.00508.x     Document Type: Review

References (81)

1. See, for example, M. Nussbaum. 1990. Love's Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press;
2. A. Jonsen & S. Toulmin. 1988. The Abuse of Casuistry. Berkeley: University of California Press;
3. A. MacIntyre. 1981. After Virtue. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press;
4. S. Toulmin. The Tyranny of Principles. Hastings Cent Rep 1981; 11: 31-39;
5. P. Foot. 1978. Virtues and Vices. Oxford: Blackwell.
6. See, for example, A.L. Carse. Impartial Principle and Moral Context: Securing a Place for the Particular in Ethical Theory. J Med Philos 1998; 23: 153-169;
7. S. Wolf, ed. 1996. Feminism and Bioethics. Beyond Reproduction. New York: Oxford University Press;
8. A. Baier. 1994. Moral Prejudices. Cambridge: Harvard University Press;
9. S. Sherwin. 1992. No Longer Patient. Philadelphia: Temple University Press;
10. V. Held. 1993. Feminist Morality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11. See, for example, L. d'Agincourt-Canning. Experiences of Genetic Risk: Disclosure and The Gendering of Responsibility. Bioethics 2001; 15(3): 231-247;
12. M.B. Mahowald. 2000. Genes, Women, Equality. New York: Oxford University Press;
13. R. Hubbard. Genetics and women's health. J Am Med Womens Assoc 1997; 52(1): 2-3;
14. A. Asch & G. Geller. 1996. Feminism, Bioethics, and Genetics. In Feminism and Bioethics: Beyond Reproduction, S. Wolf. ed. New York: Oxford University Press;
15. M.B. Mahowald. A feminist standpoint for genetics. J Clin Ethics 1996; 7(4): 333-340;
16. L. Purdy. What can progress in reproductive technology mean for women? J Med Philos 1996; 21(5): 499-514;
17. L.S. Parker. Breast cancer genetic screening and critical bioethics' gaze. J Med Philos 1995; 20(3): 313-337;
18. A. Lippman. 1993. Worrying - and worrying about - the geneticization of reproduction and health. In Misconceptions: The social construction of choice and the new reproductive technologies. vol 1., G. Basen, M. Eichler & A. Lippman, eds. Ottawa: Voyageur Press: 39-65;
19. A. Lippman. Prenatal genetic testing and screening: Constructing needs and reinforcing inequities. Am J Law Med 1991; 17: 15-50.
20. See, for example, W. Glannon. 2001. Genes and Future People. Boulder, CO: Westview Press: ch. 2;
21. R. Rhodes. Genetic Links, Family Ties, and Social Bonds: Rights and Responsibilities in the Face of Genetic Knowledge. J Med Philos 1998; 23(1): 10-30.
22. See Glannon, J Med Philos op. cit. note 4.
23. See also Rhodes, J Med Philos op. cit. note 4.
24. See, for example, Glannon, J Med Philos op. cit. note 4;
25. A. Buchanan et al. 2000. From Chance to Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: ch. 6;
26. D. Davis. Genetic Dilemmas and The Child's Right to An Open Future. Hastings Cent Rep 1997; 27(2): 7-15;
27. C. Cohen. Give me children or I shall die! New reproductive technologies and harm to children. Hastings Cent Rep 1996; 26(2): 19-27;
28. L. Purdy. 1996. Genetics and Reproductive Risk: Can Having Children Be Immoral? In Reproducing Persons: Issues in Feminist Bioethics. Ithaca: NY, Cornell University Press: 39-49;
29. B. Steinbock & R. McClamrock. When is birth unfair to the child? Hastings Cent Rep 1994; 24(6): 15-21.
30. See, for example, S. Vehmas. Just Ignore It? Parents and Genetic Information. Theor Med 2001; 22(5): 473-484;
31. T. Takala & M. Häyry. Genetic Ignorance, Moral Obligations and Social Duties. J Med Philos 2000; 25(1): 107-113;
32. T. Takala. The Right To Genetic Ignorance Confirmed. Bioethics 1999; 13(3/4): 288-293;
33. A. Huibers and A. van 't Spijker. The autonomy paradox: predictive genetic testing and autonomy: three essential problems. Patient Educ Couns 1998; 35(1): 53-62.
34. See, M. Navaie-Waliser, A. Spriggs & P. H. Feldman. Informal caregiving: differential experiences by gender. Med Care 2002; 40(12): 1249-1259;
35. K. Donelan, M. Falik & C.M. DesRoches. Caregiving: challenges and implications for women's health. Women's Health Issues 2001; 11(3): 185-200;
36. J. Wuest. Repatterning care: women's proactive management of family caregiving demands. Health Care Women Int 2000; 21: 393-411;
37. R.L. Hoffmann & A.M. Mitchell. Caregiver burden: historical development. Nurs Forum 1998; 33(4): 5-11.
38. J. Parks. 2003. No Place like Home? Bloomington: Indiana University Press;
39. E.F. Kittay. 1999. Love's Labor. New York: Routledge.
40. Wuest, Love's Labor. op. cit. note 8.
41. N. Hallowell. Doing the right thing: genetic risk and responsibility. Sociol Health Illn 1999; 21(5): 597-621.
42. d'Agincourt-Canning, Sociol Health Illn op. cit. note 3;
43. Held, Sociol Health Illn op. cit. note 2;
44. M. Walker. 1998. Moral Understandings: A Feminist Study in Ethics. New York: Routledge.
45. See, for example, C. Mackenzie & N. Stoljar, eds. 2000. Relational Autonomy. Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self. New York: Oxford University Press;
46. C. Gilligan. 1982. In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
47. See also, Baier, In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. op. cit. note 2;
48. Held, In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. op. cit. note 2.
49. Hallowell, In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. op. cit. note 11.
50. See, N. Hallowell et al. Balancing autonomy and responsibility: the ethics of generating and disclosing genetic information. J Med Ethics 2003; 29(2): 74-79;
51. G. Goelen et al. Moral concerns of different types of patients in clinical BRCA1/2 gene mutation testing. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1999; 17(5): 1595-1600;
52. J. Mason. 1996. Gender, care and sensibility in family and kin relationships. In Sex, Sensibility and the Gendered Body. J. Holland & L. Adkins, eds. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
53. Hallowell, In Sex, Sensibility and the Gendered Body. op. cit. note 11.
54. J.E. Newman et al. Gender Differences in Psychosocial Reactions to Cystic Fibrosis Carrier Testing. Am J Med Genet 2002; 113: 155;
55. G. Evers-Kiebooms et al. A stigmatizing effect of the carrier status for cystic fibrosis? Clin Genet 1994; 46: 336-343.
56. See, for example, T.M. Marteau et al. Long-term cognitive and emotional impact of genetic testing for carriers of cystic fibrosis: the effects of test result and gender. J Health Psychol 1997; 16: 51-62;
57. M. Stacey. 1996. The new genetics: A feminist view. In The troubled helix: Social and psychological implications of the new human genetics. T.M. Marteau & M.P.M. Richards, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 331-349;
58. J.C. Callahan, ed. 1995. Reproduction, Ethics, and The Law. Bloomington: Indiana University Press;
59. C. Overall. 1987. Ethics and Human Reproduction. Boston: Allen and Unwin;
60. B.K. Rothman. 1986. The Tentative Pregnancy. New York: Viking;
61. M. O'Brien. 1981. Politics of Reproduction. London: Routledge Kegan and Paul.
62. H. Bekker et al. Uptake of cystic fibrosis testing in primary care: supply push or demand pull? Br Med J 1993; 306: 158-586;
63. E.K. Watson et al. Psychological and social consequences of community carrier testing screening for cystic fibrosis. Lancet 1992; 40: 217-220.
64. Mahowald, Lancet op. cit. note 3.
65. Bekker, Lancet op. cit. note 19.
66. Watson, Lancet op. cit. note 19.
67. D. Wells & D.A. Delhanty. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: applications for molecular medicine. Trends Mol Med 2001; 7(1): 23-30.
68. I. de Melo-Martín. 1998. Making Babies: Biomedical Technologies, Reproductive Ethics, and Public Policy. Dordercht: Kluwer: ch. 4.
69. See, for example, J.V. Lacey, Jr et al. Menopausal hormone replacement therapy and risk of ovarian cancer. JAMA 2002; 288(3): 334-341;
70. C.F. Schairer et al. Menopausal estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk. JAMA 2000; 283(4): 485-491;
71. A. Venn. Risk of cancer after use of fertility drugs with in-vitro fertilization. Lancet 1999; 354(9190): 1586-1890;
72. R.E. Bristow & B.Y. Karlan. The Risk of Ovarian Cancer after Treatment for Infertility. Current Opinion in Obstetric Gynecology 1996; 8(1): 32-37;
73. A.F. Berrino et al. Serum Sex Hormone Levels after Menopause and Subsequent Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996; 88(5): 291-296.
74. See, for example, S.Y. Mitchell et al. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome associated with clomiphene citrate. West Indian Med J 2001; 50(3): 227-229;
75. A. Delvigne & S. Rozenberg. Preventive attitude of physicians to avoid OHSS in IVF patients. Hum Reprod 2001; 16(12): 2491-2495;
76. B. McElhinney & N. McClure. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2000; 14(1): 103-122.
77. See, for example, L. Koch. 1993. Physiological and Psychosocial Risks of the New Reproductive Technologies. In Tough Choices. P. Stephenson & M.G. Wagner, eds. Philadelphia: Temple University Press: 122-134;
78. P.J. Taylor & J.V. Kredentser. 1992. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Laparoscopy and Hysteroscopy and Their Relationship to in Vitro Fertilization. In A Textbook of in Vitro Fertilization and Assisted Reproductive Technology. P.R. Brinsden & P.A. Rainsbury, eds. Park Ridge, NJ: The Parthenon Publishing Group: 73-92;
79. P.R. Brinsden. 1992. Oocyte Recovery and Embryo Transfer Techniques for in Vitro Fertilization. In P.R. Brinsden & P.A. Rainsbury, eds. In A Textbook of in Vitro Fertilization and Assisted Reproductive Technology. Ibid: 139-153.
80. American Society for Reproductive Medicine and Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Assisted reproductive technology in the United States: 1999 results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine/Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry. Fertil Steril 2002; 78: 918-931.
81. R. Rhodes. Autonomy, Respect, and Genetic Information Policy: A Reply to Tuija Takala and Matti Häyry. J Med Philos 2000; 25(1): 114-120.