Human embryos as boundary objects? Some reflections on the biomedical worlds of embryonic stem cells and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis

New Genetics and Society

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 7-18

  Williams, Clare ^a   Wainwright, Steven P ^a   Ehrich, Kathryn ^a   Michael, Mike ^b  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Boundary objects; Embryonic stem cells; Human embryos; New medical technologies; Pre implantation genetic diagnosis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICINE; CONCEPT ANALYSIS; EMBRYO; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PREIMPLANTATION EMBRYO; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SKILL; SOCIOLOGY;

EID: 45849112559     PISSN: 14636778     EISSN: 14699915     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14636770701843550     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Bazanger, I., 1998. Pain physicians: all alike, all different. In: M. Berg and A. Mol, eds. Differences in medicine: unraveling practices, techniques, and bodies. Durham: Duke University Press, 119-143.
2. Becker, H.S., 1984. Art worlds. Berkeley: California University Press.
3. Braude, P., et al., 2002. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Nature Reviews Genetics, 3, 941-953.
4. Brown, N. and Webster, A., 2004. New medical technologies and society: reordering life. Cambridge: Polity Press.
5. Casper, M.J., 1998. The making of the unborn patient: a social anatomy of fetal surgery. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
6. Clarke, A.E., 1990. A social worlds research adventure: the case of reproductive science. In: S. Cozzens and T. Gieryn, eds. Theories of science in society. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 23-50.
7. Clarke, A.E., 2005. Situational analysis: grounded theory after the postmodern turn. London: Sage.
8. Cooper, M., 2004. Regenerative medicine: stems cells and the science of monstrosity. Journal of Medical Ethics: Medical Humanities, 30, 12-22.
9. Cooper, M., 2006. Resuscitations: stem cells and the crisis of old age. Body and Society, 12, 1-23.
10. Department of Health, 2005. UK stem cell initiative: [Pattison] report and recommendations. London: HMSO.
11. Ehrich, K., et al., 2006. Social welfare, genetic welfare? Boundary-work in the IVF/PGD clinic. Social Science and Medicine, 63, 1213-1224.
12. Featherstone, K., et al., 2006. Risky relations: family, kinship and the new genetics. Oxford: Berg.
13. Franklin, S., 2001. Culturing biology: cell lines for the second millennium. Health, 5, 335-354.
14. Franklin, S., 2005. Stem cells r us: emergent life forms and the global biological. In: A. Ong and S.J. Collier, eds. Global assemblages: technology, politics and ethics as anthropological problems. New York: Blackwell, 59-78.
15. Franklin, S., 2006. Embryonic economies: the double reproductive value of stem cells. BioSocieties, 1, 71-90.
16. Franklin, S. and Roberts, C., 2006. Born and made: an ethnography of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. New York: Princeton University Press.
17. Fujimura, J., 1992. Crafting science: standardized packages, boundary objects and "translations". In: A. Pickering, ed. Science as practice and culture. University of Chicago Press, 168-211.
18. Glasner, P., 1998. Patrolling the boundaries or tracing the contours: cartographic metaphors and the human genome project. In: P. Wheale, R. von Schomberg and P. Glasner, eds. The social management of genetic engineering. Aldershot: Ashgate, 29-44.
19. Harper, J.C. and Delhanty, J.D.A., 2000. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Current Opinions in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 12 (2), 67-72.
20. Hauskeller, C., 2004. How traditions of ethical reasoning and institutional processes shape stem cell research in Britain. Journal of Medical Philosophy, 29, 509-532.
21. Hauskeller, C., Bender, W. and Manzai, A., 2005. Crossing borders: cultural, religious, and political differences concerning stem cell research. A global approach. Münster: Agenda Verlag.
22. Holland, S., Lebacqz, K. and Zoloth, L., 2001. The human embryonic stem cell debate: science, ethics and public policy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
23. Jasanoff, S., 2005. Designs on nature: science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press.
24. Kalfoglou, A.L., Scott, J. and Hudson, K., 2005. PGD patients' and providers' attitudes to the use and regulation of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 11, 486-496.
25. Keating, P. and Cambrosio, A., 2003. Biomedical platforms: realigning the normal and the pathological in late-twentieth century medicine. Cambridge: MIT Press.
26. Kerr, A., 2003. Governing genetics: reifying choice and progress. New Genetics and Society, 22, 111-126.
27. Kiessling, A.A. and Anderson, S., 2003. Human embryonic stem cells: an introduction to the science and the therapeutic potential. Boston: Jones and Bartlett.
28. Kitzinger, J. and Williams, C., 2005. Forecasting science futures: legitimising hope and calming fears in the embryo stem cell debate. Social Science and Medicine, 61, 731-740.
29. Lanza, R., et al., 2004. Handbook of stem cells. Volume 1. Embryonic stem cells. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
30. Maienschein, J., 2003. Whose view of life? Embryos, cloning and stem cells. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. Meister, U., et al., 2005. Knowledge and attitudes towards preimplantation genetic diagnosis in Germany. Human Reproduction, 20, 231-238.
32. Mooney, C., 2005. The Republican war on science. New York: Basic Books.
33. Mulkay, M., 1997. The embryo research debate: science and the politics of reproduction. Cambridge University Press.
34. Parry, S., 2003. The politics of cloning: mapping the rhetorical convergence of embryos and stem cells in parliamentary debates. New Genetics and Society, 22, 145-168.
35. Pickering, S.J., et al., 2005. Generation of a human embryonic stem cell line encoding the cystic fibrosis mutation deltaF508, using preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 10, 390-397.
36. Pinto-Correia, C., 1997. The ovary of eve: egg and sperm and preformation. Chicago University Press.
37. Roberts, C. and Franklin, S., 2004. Experiencing new forms of genetic choice: findings from an ethnographic study of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Human Fertility, 7, 285-293.
38. Scott, C.T., 2006. Stem cell now: from the experiment that shook the world to the new politics of life. New York: Pi Press.
39. Star, S.L. and Griesemer, J., 1989. Institutional ecology, "translations" and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387-420.
40. Strauss, A., 1978. A social world perspective. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 1, 119-128.
41. Strauss, A.L., 1987. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge University Press.
42. Strauss, A.L., et al., 1985. Social organization of medical work. Chicago University Press.
43. Thompson, J., et al., 1998. Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science, 282, 1145-1147.
44. Wainwright, S.P., et al., 2006a. From bench to bedside? Biomedical scientists' expectations of stem cell science as a future therapy for diabetes. Social Science and Medicine, 63, 2052-2064.
45. Wainwright, S.P., et al., 2006b. Real science, biological bodies and stem cells: constructing images of beta cells in the biomedical science lab. Social Theory and Health, 4, 275-298.
46. Wainwright, S.P., et al., 2006c. Ethical boundary-work in the embryonic stem cell laboratory. Sociology of Health and Illness, 28, 732-748.
47. Wainwright, S.P., et al., 2007. Remaking the body? Scientists' genetic discourses and practices as examples of changing expectations on embryonic stem cell therapy for diabetes. New Genetics and Society.
48. Waldby, C., 2002. Stem cells, tissue cultures and the production of biovalue. Health, 6, 305-323, 26, 251-268.
49. Waters, B. and Cole-Turner, T., 2003. God and the embryo: religious voices on stem cells and cloning. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
50. Watt, H., 2004. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: choosing the "good enough" child. Health Care Analysis, 12, 51-60.
51. Weber, R., 1990. Basic content analysis. London: Sage.
52. Williams, C., Kitzinger, J. and Henderson, L., 2003. Envisaging the embryo in stem cell research: discursive strategies and media reporting of the ethical debates. Sociology of Health and Illness, 25, 793-814.