The scope of public discourse surrounding proposition 71: Looking beyond the moral status of the Embryo

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

Volumn 3, Issue 1-2, 2006, Pages 109-119

  Lysaght, Tamra ^a,b   Ankeny, Rachel A ^a   Kerridge, Ian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b University of Sydney   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bioethics; Mass media; Public policy; Stem cells; United States of America

Indexed keywords

EID: 45849144691     PISSN: 11767529     EISSN: 18724353     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11673-006-9012-7     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. Illinois: The Free Press.
2. Berkowitz, D. (1992). Who sets the media agenda? The ability of policymakers to determine news decisions. In J. D. Kennamer (Ed.), Public opinion, the press, and public policy (pp. 81–102). Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Publishers.
3. Brannigan, M. (2004). Fixations on the moral standing of the embryo. In J. M. Humber & R. F. Almeder (Eds.), Biomedical ethics reviews: stem cell research (pp. 43–57). Totowa, New Jersey: Humana Press Inc.
4. Bruck, C. (2004). Should a ballot initiative determine the fate of stem-cell research? The New Yorker (pp. 62–82), October 18.
5. Cohen, J. (2005). Proposed legislation threatens to slow California stem cell rush. Science, 307(5717), 1857.
6. Danielian, L. (1992). Interest groups in the news. In J. D. Kennamer (Ed.), Public opinion, the press, and public policy (pp. 63–79). Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Publishers.
7. Doubois, P. L., & Feeney, F. (1998). Lawmaking by initiative: issues, options and comparisons. New York: Agathon Press.
8. Garvey, M. (2004). State bets on the promise of stem cell research. Los Angeles Times (online) 2004 Nov 4 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-me-stemcell4nov04,1,5240788.story? coll=la-home-headlines.
9. Garvey, M. (2004). Stem cell initiative attracts backers. Los Angeles Times (online) 2004 Aug 31 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-stem31aug31,1,6466141.story?coll=la-headlines-california.
10. Garvey, M. (2004). Stem cell post likely to go to Klein. Los Angeles Times (online) 2004 Dec 14 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-stemcell14dec14,1,2535278.story.
11. Gaskell, G., Bauer, M., & Durant, J. (1998). The represen-tation of biotechnology: policy, media and public percep-tion. In J. Durant & M. Bauer (Eds.), Biotechnology in the public sphere (pp. 3–12). London: Science Museum.
12. Habermas, J. (1996). The transformation of the public sphere’s political function. In W. Outhwaite (Ed.), The Habermas reader. Cambridge: Polity Press.
13. Hall, C. (2004). Foes closing the gap in stem-cell measure. San Francisco Chronicle (online) 2004 Oct 15 (cited 2005 Jan 10). Available from: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/10/15/BAGV099P6N1.DTL.
14. Hall, C. (2004). Long road ahead for stem cell initiative. San Francisco Chronicle (online) 2004 Jun 4 (cited 2005 Jan 10). Available from: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/06/04/MNG1G70S381.DTL.
15. Hall, C. (2004) Medical dean put on stem cell panel. San Francisco Chronicle (online) 2004 Nov 6 (cited 2005 Jan 10). Available from: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/c/a/2004/11/06/BAGHR9NBI01.DTL.
16. Hall, C. (2004). Nominee pool grows for stem-cell czar. San Francisco Chronicle (online) 2004 Dec 12 (cited 2005 Jan 10). Available from: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article. cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/12/12/MNGN9AAPGR1. DTL%20.
17. Hall, C. (2004). Prop. 71 stem cell funds bring hopes of major breakthrough. San Francisco Chronicle (online) 2004 Dec 8 (cited 2005 Jan 10). Available from: http://www.sfgate. com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/12/08/MNGPBA8DOP1.DTL.
18. Hall, C. (2004). Stem cell panel scrubs its agenda. San Francisco Chronicle (online) 2004 Dec 17 (cited 2005 Jan 10). Available from: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/12/17/BAGA4AD74H19.DTL.
19. Hall, C. (2004). Stem-cell research’s creative financing. San Francisco Chronicle (online) 2004 Mar 15 (cited 2005 Jan 10). Available from: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article. cgi?f=/c/a/2004/03/15/MNG5T5KMGK1.DTL&hw=crea tive+financing&sn= 002&sc=742.
20. Hall, W. (2004). The Australian policy debate about human embryonic stem cell research. Health Law Review, 12(2), 27–33.
21. Harvey, O. (2005). Regulating stem-cell research and human cloning in an Australian context: an exercise in protecting the status of the human subject. New Genetics and Society, 24(2), 125-136.
22. Hiltzik, M. (2004). Benefits of stem cell bond issue in question. Los Angeles Times (online) 2004 Aug 23 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-golden23aug23,1,4524240.column?coll=la-headlines-business.
23. Hiltzik, M. (2004). Stem cell initiative lacks oversight. Los Angeles Times (online) 2004 Dec 9 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-golden 9dec09,0,621989.column?coll=la-home-utilities.
24. Holm, S. (2002). Going to the roots of the stem cell controversy. Bioethics, 16(6), 493–507.
25. Ingram, C., & Rau, J. (2004). Stem cell initiative certified for ballot. Los Angeles Times (online) 2004 Jun 4 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-stem4jun04,1,4881799.story?coll=la-home-headlines.
26. Javitt, G. H., Suthers, K., & Hudson, K. (2005). Cloning: a policy analysis. Genetics and Public Policy Center (online) 2005 April (cited 2005 Sep 15). Available from: http://tools-content.labvelocity.com/pdfs/8/68038.pdf.
27. Johnson, J. A., & Williams, E. D. (2005). Congressional research service report for Congress: stem cell research. Congressional Research Service (online) 2005 July 18 (cited 2005 Sept 15). Available from: http://www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/RL31015.pdf.
28. Kelly, S. E. (2003). Public bioethics and publics: consensus, boundaries, and participation in biomedical science policy. Science, Technology and Human Values, 28(3), 339–364.
29. Kennamer, J. D. (1992). Public opinion, the press, and public policy: an introduction. In: J. D. Kennamer (Ed.), Public opinion, the press, and public policy (pp. 1–17). Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Publishers.
30. Key, V. O., & Crouch, W. W. (1939). The initiative and referendum in California. Berkeley: University of California Press.
31. Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications.
32. Mathews, J., & Garvey, M. (2004). Schwarzenegger backs stem cell study. Los Angeles Times (online) 2004 Oct 19 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-me-stem19oct19,1,1233747.story? coll=la-home-headlines.
33. Mathews, J. (2004). Stem-cell research initiative receives endorsement. Los Angeles Times (online) 2004 Jun 19 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.latimes. com/news/local/la-me-stem19jun19,1,2598641,print.story? coll=la-headlines-california.
34. McQuail, D. (1977). The influence and effects of mass media. In: J. Curran, M. Gurevitch, J. Woollacott, J. Marriott, & C. Roberts (Ed.), Mass communication and society (pp. 70–93). Beverley Hills, California: SAGE Publications.
35. Mecoy, L. (2004). Clergy from Sacramento area to denounce stem-cell initiative. Sacramento Bee (online) 2004 Oct 26 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/11220120p-12135 904c.html.
36. Mecoy, L. (2004). George Schultz backs stem cell bond measure. Sacramento Bee (online) 2004 Sep 8 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.parkinsons-informa tion-exchange-network-online.com/parkmail1/2004c/msg00 748.html.
37. Mecoy, L. (2004). No on stem-cell bond. Sacramento Bee (online) 2004 Aug 8 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/10312291p-11232418c.html.
38. Mecoy, L. (2004). Stem cell backers cite savings. Sacramento Bee (online) 2004 Sep 15 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/10747352p-11665736c.html.
39. Mecoy, L. (2004). Stem cell measure aims for the sky. Sacramento Bee (online) 2004 Oct 10 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/ca/election/story/11044253p-11961089c.html.
40. Mecoy, L. (2004). Stem cell panel gains momentum. Sacramento Bee (online) 2004 Nov 18 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.genetics-and-society.org/newsdisp.asp?id=657.
41. Mecoy, L. (2004). TV ad enlists Nobel winner to tout Prop. 71. Sacramento Bee (online) 2004 Sep 29 (cited 2005 Jan 14). Available from: http://www.sacbee.com/content/poli tics/story/10912680p-11830241c.html.
42. Nelkin, D. (1987). Selling science. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
43. Nippert, I. (2002). The pros and cons of human therapeutic cloning in the public debate. Journal of Biotechnology, 98 (1), 53–60.
44. Nisbet, M. C., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2002). Biotechnology and the American media: the policy process and the elite press. Science Communication, 23(4), 359–391.
45. Nisbet, M. C. (2003). Framing science: the stem cell controversy in an age of press/politics. Harvard Interna-tional Journal of Press/Politics, 8(2), 36–70.
46. Parry, S. (2003). The politics of cloning: mapping the rhetorical convergence of embryos and stem cells in parliamentary debates. New Genetics and Society, 22(2), 145–168.
47. Pollack, A. (2004). Measure passed, California weighs its future as a stem cell epicenter. New York Times (online) 2004 Nov 4 (cited 2005 Jan 10). Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/technology/04cell.html? ex=1257483600&en=374ccaecaaffed45&ei=5088&partner= rssnyt.
48. Priest, S. H. (2001). Cloning: a study in news production. Public Understanding of Science, 10(1), 59–69.
49. Skelton, G. (2004). Is stem cell research the next big thing for California? Los Angeles Times (online) 2004 Oct 14 (cited 2005 Feb 23). Available from: http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-cap14oct14,1,7436907.column.
50. Stevens, J. (2004). California initiative review: November 2004 initiatives—Proposition 71. Capital Centre for Gov-ernment Law and Policy (online) 2004 Aug 23 (cited 2005 Jan 17). Available from: http://www.mcgeorge.edu/govern ment_law_and_policy/california_initiative_review/novem ber_2004/ccglp_cir_nov2004_prop_71.htm.
51. Tansey, B. (2004). Prop. 71’s fine print contains surprises. San Francisco Chronicle (online) 2004 Dec 8 (cited 2005 Jan 10). Available from: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/12/08/MNGPBA8DPN1.DTL.
52. Walters, L. (2004). Human embryonic stem cell research: an intercultural perspective. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Jour-nal, 14(1), 3–39.
53. Williams, C., Kitzinger, J., & Henderson, L. (2003). Envisaging the embryo in stem cell research: rhetorical strategies and media reporting of the ethical debates. Sociology of Health & Illness, 25(7), 793–814.