Genetics on stage: Public engagement in health policy development on preimplantation genetic diagnosis

Social Science and Medicine

Volumn 68, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 1472-1480

  Cox, Susan M ^a   Kazubowski Houston, Magdalena ^b   Nisker, Jeff ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b TRENT UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c WESTERN UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Canada; Genetics; Health policy development; Public engagement methods; Reproduction; Theatre

Indexed keywords

GENETIC ANALYSIS; HEALTH EXPENDITURE; HEALTH POLICY; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; POLICY DEVELOPMENT; PUBLIC HEALTH; REPRODUCTION;

ARTICLE; CANADA; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; GENETIC ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE POLICY; PREIMPLANTATION EMBRYO; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS;

CANADA; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; DRAMA; FOCUS GROUPS; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; PREIMPLANTATION DIAGNOSIS; PUBLIC OPINION;

CANADA; NORTH AMERICA;

ORCHIDACEAE;

EID: 63149127993     PISSN: 02779536     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.01.044     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Abelson J., Forest P.-G., Eyles J., Smith P., Martin E., and Gauvin F.-P. Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Social Science & Medicine 57 2 (2003) 239-251
2. Abelson J., and Gauvin F.-P. Assessing the impacts of public participation: Concepts, evidence and policy implications (2006), Canadian Policy Research Networks
3. Artaud A. The theater and its double (1958), Grove Weidenfeld, New York
4. Beeson D., and Lippman A. Egg harvesting for stem cell research: medical risks and ethical problems. RBM Online 13 (2006) 1-11
5. Belliveau G. Dramatizing the data: an ethnodramatic exploration of a playbuilding process. Arts and Learning Research Journal 23 (2007)
6. Boal A. Legislative theatre: Using performance to make politics (1998), Routledge, London
7. Brecht B. Brecht on theatre: The development of an aesthetic (1964), Hill and Wang, New York
8. Brunger F., and Cox S.M. Ethics and genetics: the need for transparency. In: Miller F., Weir L., Mykitiuk R., Lee P., Sherwin S., and Tudiver S. (Eds). The gender of genetic futures: The Canadian biotechnology strategy, women and health. Proceedings of a National Strategic Workshop held at York University, February 11-12, 2000 (2000) 27-31 Toronto
9. Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis (2006), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
10. Coleman S., and Gøtze J. Bowling together: Online public engagement in policy deliberation (2001), Hansard Society, London
11. Cox S.M., and Starzomski R.C. Genes and geneticization? The social construction of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. New Genetics and Society 23 2 (2004) 133-166
12. Davis K.K., Davis J.S., and Dowler L. In motion, out of place: the public space(s) of Tourette syndrome. Social Science & Medicine 59 1 (2004) 103-112
13. Diamond D. Practicing democracy (2004) Vancouver, Canada
14. Dresser R. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis as medical innovation: reflections from The President's Council on Bioethics. Fertility and Sterility 85 6 (2006) 1633-1637
15. Editor. New reproductive technology board belies expert selection process. Canadian Medical Association Journal 176 5 (2007) 611-612
16. Einsiedel E.F., and Eastlick D.L. Consensus conferences as deliberative democracy - a communications perspective. Science Communication 21 4 (2000) 323-343
17. ESHRE Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis Consortium. 2002 Data collection III. Human Reproduction 17 1 (2002) 233-246
18. Franklin S., and Roberts C. Born and made: An ethnography of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (2006), Princeton University Press, Princeton
19. Gergen M.M., and Gergen K.J. Qualitative inquiry: tensions and transformations. In: Denzin N.K., and Lincoln Y.S. (Eds). The handbook of qualitative research (2000), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA 1025-1046
20. Gray R., and Sinding C. Standing ovation: Performing social science research about cancer (2002), AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek/Lanham/New York/Oxford
21. Handyside A., Pattinson J., Penketh R., Delhanty J., Winston R., and Tuddenham E. Biopsy of human preimplantation embryos and sexing by DNA amplification. Lancet 344 (1989) 347-349
22. Hildt E. Autonomy and freedom of choice in prenatal genetic diagnosis. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 1 (2002) 65-71
23. Horlick-Jones T., Rowe G., and Walls J. Citizen engagement processes as information systems: the role of knowledge and the concept of translation quality. Public Understanding of Science 16 (2007) 259-278
24. Johnson M. Moral imagination: Implications of cognitive science for ethics (1993), University of Chicago Press, Chicago
25. Mienczakowski J. The theater of ethnography: the reconstruction of ethnography into theater with emancipatory potential. Qualitative Inquiry 1 3 (1995) 360-375
26. Mills C.W. The sociological imagination (1959), Oxford University Press, New York
27. Minister of Health, Canada. Issues related to the regulation of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis under the assisted human reproduction act (2005), A.H.R.I. Office
28. Mykitiuk R., Nisker J., and Bluhm R. The Canadian assisted human reproduction act: protecting women's health while potentially allowing human somatic cell nuclear transfer into non-human oocytes. American Journal of Bioethics 7 2 (2007) 71-73
29. Nisker J.A. Orchids: not necessarily a gospel. In: Murray J. (Ed). Mappa mundi: Mapping culture/mapping the world (2001), University of Windsor Press, Windsor, Ontario 61-109
30. Nisker J., Cox S.M., and Kazubowski-Houston M. Citizen deliberation on preimplantation genetic diagnosis (2006), Health Canada, Ottawa
31. Nisker J., and Daar A.S. Moral presentation of genetics-based narratives for public understanding of genetic science and its implications. Public Understanding of Science 15 1 (2006) 113-123
32. Nisker J., Martin D.K., Bluhm R., and Daar A.S. Theatre as a public engagement tool for health-policy development. Health Policy 78 (2006) 258-271
33. Nussbaum M. Upheavals of thought: The intelligence of the emotions (2001), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
34. Reddy M.J. The conduit metaphor-a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In: Ortony A. (Ed). Metaphor and thought (1993), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 164-201
35. Rowe G., and Frewer L.J. Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Science Technology Human Values 25 1 (2000) 3-29
36. Rowe G., and Frewer L.J. Evaluating public-participation exercises: a research agenda. Science Technology Human Values 29 4 (2004) 512-556
37. Rowe G., and Frewer L.J. A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Science Technology Human Values 30 2 (2005) 251-290
38. Stuttaford M., Bryanston C., Hundt G.L., Connor M., Thorogood M., and Tollman S. Use of applied theatre in health research dissemination and data validation: a pilot study from South Africa. Health (London) 10 1 (2006) 31-45
39. Tutton R. Constructing participation in genetic databases: citizenship, governance, and ambivalence. Science Technology Human Values 32 2 (2007) 172-195
40. Verlinsky Y. Preimplantation diagnosis: an alternative to prenatal diagnosis of genetic and chromosomal disorders. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 16 4 (1999)
41. Weldon S. Public engagement in genetics: A review of current practice in the UK (2004), Institute for Environment, Philosophy and Public Policy, Lancaster University
42. Wilkinson S. Focus groups in feminist research: power, interaction, and the co-construction of meaning. Women's Studies International Forum 21 1 (1998) 111-125
43. Wyman M. The defiant imagination: Why culture matters (2004), Douglas & McIntyre, Vancouver
44. Wynne B. Preface to public engagement in genetics: A review of current practice in the UK (2004), Institute for Environment, Philosophy and Public Policy, Lancaster University