ELSIfication in Canada: Legal Modes of Reasoning

Science as Culture

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 77-99

  López, José Julián ^a   Lunau, Janet ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

analogy; compressed foresight; ELSI; juridification; legal modes of reasoning; reflective equilibrium

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858179830     PISSN: 09505431     EISSN: 14701189     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09505431.2011.576240     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Arthurs, H. W. and Kreklewich, R. 1996. Law, legal institutions, and the legal profession in the new economy. Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 34(1): 1-60.
2. Beauchamp, T. L. and Childress, J. F. 2001. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Beer, W. M. and Jansen, A. J. A. 2004. Ethical Legal and Societal Aspects of Genomics Research in the EU, Canada and the US, (European Commission. [online]. Available at: http://www.genomics.nl/resources/Documents/Int_initiatives/Inventory_ELSA_final.pdf (accessed 2 July 2009)
4. Bennett, I. and Sarewitz, D. 2006. Too little, too late? Research policies on the societal implications of nanotechnology in the United States. Science as Culture, 15(4): 309-325.
5. Billingsley, B. and Caulfield, T. 2004. The regulation of science and the Charter of Rights: would a ban on non-reproductive human cloning unjustifiably violate freedom of expression?. Queen's Law Journal, 29(2): 647-679.
6. Bourdieu, P. 1987. The force of law: towards sociology of the juridical field. Hastings Law Journal, 38(4): 814-853.
7. Caulfield, T. 1998. Testing adolescents for the Alzheimer gene: tensions in law and policy. Manitoba Law Journal, 25(1): 31-47.
8. Caulfield, T. 2000a. Clones, controversy and criminal law: a comment on the proposal for legislation governing assisted human reproduction. Alberta Law Review, 39(2): 335-345.
9. Caulfield, T. 2000b. Genetic testing, liability and regulatory policy: the Canadian situation. Jurimetrics, 41(1): 7-21.
10. Caulfield, T. 2002a. Ethics watch: public perceptions and regulatory policy. Nature Reviews Genetics, 3(12): 902
11. Caulfield, T. 2002b. Politics, prohibitions and the lost public perspective: a comment on Bill C-56: The Assisted Human Reproduction Act. Alberta Law Review, 40(2): 451-463.
12. Caulfield, T. 2003a. Sustainability and the balancing of health care and innovation agendas: the commercialization of genetic research. Saskatchewan Law Review, 66(1): 629-645.
13. Caulfield, T. 2003b. Human cloning laws, human dignity, and the poverty of the policymaking dialogue. BMC Medical Ethics, 4(3): 1-7.
14. Caulfield, T., Einseidel, E., Merz, J. F. and Nicol, D. 2006. Trust, patents, and public perceptions: the governance of controversial biotechnology research. Nature Biotechnology, 24(11): 1352-1354.
15. Caulfield, T. and Gold, E. R. 2000. Genetic testing, ethical concerns, and the role of patent law. Clinical Genetics, 57(31): 70-75.
16. Caulfield, T., Gold, E. R. and Cho, M. K. 2000. Patenting human genetic material: refocusing the debate. Nature Reviews Genetics, 1(12): 227-231.
17. Christianson, A. and Modell, B. 2004. Medical genetics in developing countries. Annual Review of Genomics, 5: 219-265.
18. Cotterrell, R. 1998. Why must legal ideas be interpreted sociologically. Journal of Law and Society, 25(2): 171-192.
19. Cotton R. G., Sallée, C. and Knoppers, B. M. (2005) Locus-specific databases: from ethical principles to practice, Human Mutation, 26(5), pp. 489-493.
20. Daniels, N. 1996. Justice and Justification: Reflective Equilibrium in Theory and Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Elliot, C. 2005. The soul of a new machine: bioethicists in the bureaucracy. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 14(4): 379-384.
22. Evans, J. 2002. Playing God? Human Genetic Engineering and the Rationalization of Public Bioethical Debate, Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
23. Ewick, P., Kagan, R. and Sarat, A. 1999. "Legacies of legal realism: social science, social policy, and the law". In Social Science, Social Policy, and the Law, Edited by: Ewick, P., Kagan, R. and Sarat, A. 1-38. New York: Russell Sage.
24. Fisher, E. 2005. Lessons learned from the ethical, legal and social implications (ELSI). Technology and Society, 27(3): 321-328.
25. Goodrich, P. 2000. Law-induced anxiety: legists, anti-lawyers and the boredom of legality. Social and Legal Studies, 9(1): 143-163.
26. Gottweis, H. 1998. Governing Molecules, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Greely, H. T. 2006. Neuroethics and ELSI: similarities and differences. Minnesota Journal of Science and Technology, 6(1): 599-637.
28. Guston, D. H. 2004. "CRIs in the wilderness: toward centers for responsible innovation in the commercialized academy". In Buying In or Selling Out, Edited by: Stein, D. 161-174. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
29. Habermas, J. 1987. The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. II, Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
30. Hoeyer, K. L. and Tutton, R. 2005. 'Ethics was here': studying the language-games of ethics in the case of the UK Biobank. Critical Public Health, 14(4): 385-397.
31. Huijer, M. 2003. Reconsidering democracy: history of the human genome project. Science Communication, 24(4): 479-502.
32. Illes, J. and Racine, E. 2005. Imaging or imagining? A neuroethics challenge informed by genetics. The American Journal of Bioethics, 5(2): 5-18.
33. Jasanoff, S. 2003. Technologies of humility: citizen participation in the governing of science. Minerva, 41(3): 223-244.
34. Jasanoff, S. 2005. Designs on Nature, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35. Jones, N. 2010. Science survives Canadian budget. Nature, 464(3): 153
36. Kitcher, P. 2001. Science, Truth and Democracy, New York: Oxford University Press.
37. Knoppers, B. M. 1991. Human Dignity and Genetic Heritage, Ottawa: Law Reform Commission of Canada.
38. Knoppers, B. M. 1996. Legal aspects of genetics, work and insurance in Europe and North America. European Journal of Health Law, 3(2): 143-161.
39. Knoppers, B. M. 1998. Socio-ethical Issues in Human Genetics, Québec: Les Éditions Yvon Blais.
40. Knoppers, B. M. 1999. "Who should have access to genetic information?". In The Genetic Revolution in Human Rights, Edited by: Burley, J. 39-53. New York: Oxford University Press.
41. Knoppers, B. M. 2002. Genetic information and the family: are we our brother's keeper?. TRENDS in Biotechnology, 20(2): 85-86.
42. Knoppers, B. M. 2005. Biobanking: international norms. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, 33(1): 7-14.
43. Knoppers, B. M., Hurtle, M. and Lormeau, S. 1996. Ethical issues in international collaborative research on the human genome: the HGP and the HGDP. Genomics, 34(2): 272-282.
44. Knoppers, B. M., Hurtle, M., Lormeau, S., Laberge, C. M. and Laflamme, M. 1998. Control of DNA samples and information. Genomics, 50(3): 385-401.
45. Knoppers, B. M., Saginur, R. and Cash, H. 2006. Ethical issues in secondary uses of human biological tissues from mass disasters. American Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, 34(2): 352-365.
46. Krieken, R. V. 2006. Law's autonomy in action: anthropology and history in court. Social and Legal Studies, 15(4): 574-590.
47. López, J. J. and Robertson, A. 2007. Ethics or politics? The emergence of ELSI discourse in Canada. The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 44(2): 201-218.
48. Luhmann, N. 1992. Operational closure and structural coupling: the differentiation of the legal system. Cardozo Law Review, 13(4): 1419-1441.
49. Macnaghten, P., Kearnes, M. B. and Wynne, B. 2005. Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: what role for the social sciences?. Science Communication, 27(2): 147-159.
50. Marshall, E. 1996. The genome program's conscience. Science, 274(5287): 488-490.
51. McCain, L. 2002. Informing technology policy decisions: the US human genome's project's ethical, legal and social implications programs as a critical case. Technology and Society, 24(1-2): 111-132.
52. Mnyusiwalla, A., Daar, A. S. and Singer, P. A. 2003. Mind the gap: science and ethics in nanotechnology. Nanotechnology, 14(3): 9-13.
53. Peczenik, A. 2004. "Justice in legal doctrine". In Law, Legal Culture and Politics in the Twenty First Century, Edited by: Doeker-Mach, G. and Ziegert, K. A. 197-211. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
54. Ries, N. and Caulfield, Y. 2006. First pharmacogenomics, next nutrigenomics: genohype or genohealthy?. Jurimetrics, 46(3): 281-308.
55. Rip, A. (2002) Co-evolution of Science, Technology and Society. An expert review for BMFF [online]. Available at: http://www.sciencepolicystudies.de/dok/expertise-rip.pdf (accessed 2 July 2009).
56. Rip, A. 2008. "Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: bridging gaps through constructive technology assessment". In Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research, Edited by: Hadorn, G. H., Hoffmann-Riem, H., Biber-Klemm, S., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., Joye, D.Pohl, C. 145-157. Netherlands: Springer.
57. Roy, D. J. and Williams, J. R. 1995. "Medical ethics history of Canada". In Encyclopaedia of Bioethics, Edited by: Reich, W. T. 1632-1639. New York: Macmillan.
58. Rubin, E. L. 1997. Law and the methodology of law. Wisconsin Law Review, 521(3): 521-565.
59. Schneider, C. E. 1994. Bioethics in the language of the law. The Hastings Center Report, 24(4): 16-22.
60. Shapiro, M. 1972. Toward a theory of stare decisis. Journal of Legal Studies, 1(1): 125-134.
61. Strathern, M. 2003. Re-describing society. Minerva, 41(3): 263-276.
62. Sunstein, C. R. 1993. On analogical reasoning. Harvard Law Review, 106(3): 741-791.
63. Teubner, G. 1987. "Juridification: concepts, aspects, limits, solutions". In Juridification of Social Spheres, Edited by: Teubner, G. 3-48. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
64. Tomlins, C. 2000. Framing the field of law's disciplinary encounters: a historical narrative. Law and Society Review, 34(4): 911-972.
65. Turner, L. 2003. The tyranny of 'genethics'. Nature Biotechnology, 21(11): 1282
66. Valverde, M. 2006. The sociology of law as a 'means against struggle itself'. Social and Legal Studies, 15(4): 591-597.
67. Vick, D. W. 2004. Interdisciplinarity and the discipline of law. Journal of Law and Society, 31(2): 163-193.
68. Weinreb, L. L. 2005. Legal Reason: The Use of Analogy in Legal Argument, New York: Cambridge University Press.
69. Williams, J. R. 1989. Commissions and biomedical ethics: the Canadian experience. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 14(4): 425-444.
70. Williams, R. 2006. Compressed foresight and narrative bias: pitfalls in assessing high technology futures. Science as Culture, 15(4): 327-348.
71. Yovel, J. and Mertz, E. 2004. "The role of social science in legal decisions". In The Blackwell Companion to Law and Society, Edited by: Sarat, A. 410-431. Malden, MA: Blackwell.