Public bioethics and public engagement: The politics of "proper talk"

Public Understanding of Science

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 197-211

  Moore, Alfred ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Bioethics; Genetic and reproductive technologies; Governance of science and technology; Interaction experts publics; Public consultations

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BIOETHICS; CONSUMER; DECISION MAKING; FRANCE; GERMANY; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; POLICY; POLITICS; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PUBLIC OPINION; SCIENCE; UNITED KINGDOM;

ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; BIOETHICS; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; DECISION MAKING; FRANCE; GERMANY; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; POLITICS; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PUBLIC OPINION; PUBLIC POLICY; SCIENCE;

EID: 77749324866     PISSN: 09636625     EISSN: 13616609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963662508096781     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Ashby, L. (1975) Report of the Working Party on the Experimental Manipulation of the Genetic Composition of Micro-organisms. Cmnd 5880. London: HMSO.
2. Berg, P., Baltimore, D., Boyer, H.W., Cohen, S.N., Davis, R.W., Hogness, D.S., Nathans, D., Roblin, R., Watson, J.D., Weissman, S. and Zinder, N.D. (1974) Potential Biohazards of Recombinant DNA Molecules, Science 185: 303.
3. Black, J. (1998) Regulation as Facilitation: Negotiating the Genetic Revolution, Modern Law Review 61(5): 621-60.
4. Braun, K. (2006) Framing Self-Government: Liberalism and the Bioethics Regime in the Light of Schmitt and Foucault, paper presented to The Politics of Ethics and the Crisis of Government, University of Washington, Seattle.
5. Braun, K. (2008) '.. a Certain Amount of Engineering Involved': Scientific Governance, the Participatory Turn and the New Genetics, BIOS seminar, 6 March, London School of Economics.
6. Braun, K., Herrmann, S., Koenninger, S. and Moore, A. (2008) Die Sprache der Ethik und die Politik des richtigen Sprechens. Regulative Ethikregime in Deutschland, Frankreich und Gro&eszett;britannien, in R. Mayntz, F. Neidhardt, P. Weingart and U. Wengenroth (eds) Wissensproduktion und Wissenstransfer: Wissen im Spannungsfeld von Wissenschaft, Politik und Öffentlichkeit, pp. 221-43. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.
7. Cabinet Office and Office of Science and Technology (OST) (1999) The Advisory and Regulatory Framework for Biotechnology: Report from the Government's Review. London: Stationery Office, Cabinet Office and Office of Science and Technology.
8. Callahan, D. (1993) Why America Accepted Bioethics, Hastings Centre Report 23(6): 8-9.
9. Council for Science and Technology (CST) (2005) Policy through Dialogue: Informing Policies Based on Science and Technology. London: Council for Science and Technology.
10. Dean, M. (1999) Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society. London: SAGE.
11. Devlin, P. (1959) The Enforcement of Morals: Maccabaean Lecture in Jurisprudence of the British Academy. London: Oxford University Press.
12. Dickson, D. (1984) The New Politics of Science. New York: Pantheon Books.
13. Durant, J. (1999) Participatory Technology Assessment and the Democratic Model of the Public Understanding of Science, Science and Public Policy 26(5): 313-19.
14. Evans, J.H. (2002) Playing God: Human Genetic Engineering and the Rationalization of the Public Bioethical Debate. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
15. Fiorino, D.J. (1989) Technical and Democratic Values in Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis 9: 293-9.
16. Grobstein, C. (1979) A Double Image of the Double Helix: The Recombinant DNA Debate. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
17. Habermas, J. (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Hagendijk, R. (2004) The Public Understanding of Science and Public Participation in Regulated Worlds, Minerva 42: 41-59.
19. Haimes, E. (2002) What Can the Social Sciences Contribute to the Study of Ethics? Theoretical, Empirical and Substantive Considerations, Bioethics 16(2): 89-113.
20. Hedgecoe, A. (2004) Critical Bioethics: Beyond the Social Science Critique of Applied Ethics, Bioethics 18(2): 120-43.
21. Herrmann, S.L. (2005) Interpretive Regimes and the Management of Political Conflict: Reprogenetics in the UK, paper presented at Workshop 16, ECPR (European Consortium for Political Research) Joint Sessions, Granada.
22. Herrmann, S. and Koenninger, S. (2008) '.. But You Can Not Influence the Direction of Your Thinking': Guiding Self-Government in Bioethics Policy Discourse, in B. Katz Rothman and E.M. Armstrong (eds) Bioethical Issues: Sociological Perspectives, pp. 205-23. Oxford: Elsevier.
23. Hoeyer, K. (2006) The Power of Ethics: A Case Study from Sweden on the Social Life of Moral Concerns in Policy Processes, Sociology of Health and Illness 28(6): 785-801.
24. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (2003) Sex Selection: Options for Regulation. London: HFEA.
25. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (2004) Pre-Implantation Tissue-Typing. London: HFEA.
26. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (2007) Hybrids and Chimeras: A Consultation on the Ethical and Social Implications of Creating Human/Animal Embryos in Research. London: HFEA.
27. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority/Human Genetics Advisory Commission (1998) Cloning Issues in Reproduction, Science and Medicine: A Consultation Paper. London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority/Human Genetics Advisory Commission.
28. Human Genetics Commission (2002) The Supply of Genetic Tests Direct to the Public: A Consultation Document. London: HGC.
29. Human Genetics Commission (2006) Making Babies: Reproductive Decisions and Genetic Technologies. London: HGC.
30. Irwin, A. (2006) The Politics of Talk: Coming to Terms with the 'New' Scientific Governance, Social Studies of Science 63: 299-320.
31. Irwin, A. and Michael, M. (2003) Science, Social Theory and Public Knowledge. Maidenhead and Philadelphia: Open University Press.
32. Jasanoff, S. (1990) The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Jasanoff, S. (2003) Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science, Minerva 41(3): 223-44.
34. Jasanoff, S. (2005a) Democracies of DNA: Ontological Uncertainty and Political Order in Three States, New Genetics and Society 24(2): 139-55.
35. Jasanoff, S. (2005b) Designs on Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
36. Kelly, S. (2003) Public Bioethics and Publics: Consensus, Boundaries, and Participation in Biomedical Science Policy, Science, Technology and Human Values 28: 339-64.
37. Krimsky, S. (1982) Genetic Alchemy: The Social History of the Recombinant DNA Controversy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Leinhos, M. (2005) The US National Bioethics Advisory Commission as a Boundary Organisation, Science and Public Policy 32(6): 423-33.
39. Levitt, M., Weiner, K. and Goodacre, J. (2005) Gene Week: A Novel Way of Consulting the Public, Public Understanding of Science 14: 67-79.
40. Miah, A. (2005) Genetics, Cyberspace and Bioethics: Why Not a Public Engagement with Ethics?, Public Understanding of Science 14: 409-21.
41. Mulkay, M. (1997) The Embryo Research Debate: Science and the Politics of Reproduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (1993) Genetic Screening: Ethical Issues. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
43. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2000) Nuffield Council on Bioethics: 1992-1999. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
44. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2005) Memorandum on the Provision of Bioethics Advice, in House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee, Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law, Appendix 83. London: Science and Technology Select Committee.
45. Plough, A. and Krimsky, S. (1987) The Emergence of Risk Communications Studies: Social and Political Context, Science, Technology, and Human Values 12: 4-10.
46. Salter, B. and Jones, M. (2005) Biobanks and Bioethics: The Politics of Legitimation, Journal of European Public Policy 12: 710-32.
47. Sanderson, S., Wardle, J. and Michie, S. (2005) The Effects of a Genetic Information Leaflet on Public Attitudes towards Genetic Testing, Public Understanding of Science 14: 213-24.
48. Schultz, S., Braun, K. and Griessler, E. (2007) The Governance of Genetic Testing: Non-Antagonistic Setting, 'Authentic Publics' and Moments of Unease, Final Report of Work Package 3, Participatory Governance and Institutional Innovation [PAGANINI]. URL: http://www.univie.ac.at/LSG/paganini/output.htm.
49. STC (House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee) (2005) Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law. London: Science and Technology Select Committee.
50. Stirling, A. (2005) Opening Up or Closing Down? Analysis, Participation and Power in the Social Appraisal of Technology, in M. Leach, I. Scoones and B. Wynne (eds) Science and Citizens: Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement, pp. 218-31. London: Zed Books.
51. Warnock, M. (1984) Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilization and Embryology. London: HMSO.
52. Warnock, M. (1985) A Question of Life: The Warnock Report on Human Fertilization and Embryology. Oxford: Blackwell.
53. Wildavsky, A. (1979) Speaking Truth to Power: The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
54. Wright, S. (1994) Molecular Politics: Developing American and British Regulatory Policy for Genetic Engineering, 1972-1982. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
55. Wynne, B. (2002) Risk and Environment as Legitimatory Discourses of Technology: Reflexivity Inside Out?, Current Sociology 50(3): 459-77.
56. Wynne, B. (2005) Risk as Globalizing 'Democratic' Discourse? Framing Subjects and Citizens, in M. Leach, I. Scoones and B. Wynne (eds) Science and Citizens: Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement, pp. 66-82. London: Zed Books.