Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Do Groups Have Moral Standing in Unregulated mHealth Research?Joon-Ho Yu & Eric Juengst - 2020 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 48 (S1):122-128.
    Biomedical research using data from participants’ mobile devices borrows heavily from the ethos of the “citizen science” movement, by delegating data collection and transmission to its volunteer subjects. This engagement gives volunteers the opportunity to feel like partners in the research and retain a reassuring sense of control over their participation. These virtues, in turn, give both grass-roots citizen science initiatives and institutionally sponsored mHealth studies appealing features to flag in recruiting participants from the public. But while grass-roots citizen science (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Unjustified Discrimination: Is the Moratorium on the use of Genetic Test Results by Insurers a Contradiction in Terms? [REVIEW]Ruth Wilkinson - 2010 - Health Care Analysis 18 (3):279-293.
    This paper considers the legal position of genetic test results in insurance law in England and Wales. The strict position is that this information is material to the decision of the insurer to offer insurance cover and should be disclosed by insurance applicants. However, the British Government and the Association of British Insurers have agreed to a moratorium on the use of genetic test results in insurance, which will run until 2014. The moratorium prohibits unfavourable treatment of insurance clients on (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The meaning of community consultation.Terri A. Schmidt, Nicole M. DeIorio & Katie B. McClure - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (3):30 – 32.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Genomic Essentialism: Its Provenance and Trajectory as an Anticipatory Ethical Concern.Maya Sabatello & Eric Juengst - 2019 - Hastings Center Report 49 (S1):10-18.
    Since the inception of large‐scale human genome research, there has been much caution about the risks of exacerbating a number of socially dangerous attitudes linked to human genetics. These attitudes are usually labeled with one of a family of genetic or genomic “isms” or “ations” such as “genetic essentialism,” “genetic determinism,” “genetic reductionism,” “geneticization,” “genetic stigmatization,” and “genetic discrimination.” The psychosocial processes these terms refer to are taken to exacerbate several ills that are similarly labeled, from medical racism and psychological (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The routinisation of genomics and genetics: implications for ethical practices.M. W. Foster, C. D. M. Royal & R. R. Sharp - 2006 - Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (11):635-638.
    Among bioethicists and members of the public, genetics is often regarded as unique in its ethical challenges. As medical researchers and clinicians increasingly combine genetic information with a range of non-genetic information in the study and clinical management of patients with common diseases, the unique ethical challenges attributed to genetics must be re-examined. A process of genetic routinisation that will have implications for research and clinical ethics, as well as for public conceptions of genetic information, is constituted by the emergence (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Protecting communities in biomedical research.Patricia A. Marshall & Jessica W. Berg - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (3):28 – 30.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Genetic Determinism and Discrimination: A Call to Re-Orient Prevailing Human Rights Discourse to Better Comport with the Public Implications of Individual Genetic Testing.Karen Eltis - 2007 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 35 (2):282-294.
    Genetic testing can not only provide information about diseases but also their prevalence in ethnic, gender, or other vulnerable populations. While offering the promise of significant therapeutic benefits and serving to highlight our commonality, genetic information also raises a number of sensitive human rights issues touching on identity and the perception thereof, as well as the possibility of discrimination and social stigma. It stands to reason that the results of individual screenings could haplessly be used to make general assumptions about (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Genetic Determinism and Discrimination: A Call to Re-Orient Prevailing Human Rights Discourse to Better Comport with the Public Implications of Individual Genetic Testing.Karen Eltis - 2007 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 35 (2):282-294.
    “Privacy considerations no longer arise out of particular individual problems; rather, they express conflicts affecting everyone.”Along with the promise of assuaging the scourge of disease, the so-called genetic revolution unquestioningly imports a slew of thorny human rights issues that touch on matters such as dignity, disclosure, and the subject of this article – genetic testing and the social stigma potentially deriving therefrom.It is now rather evident that certain otherwise therapeutically promising forms of research can inadvertently involve social risks exceeding the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Parental authority, future autonomy, and assessing risks of predictive genetic testing in Minors.A. Boyce & P. Borry - 2009 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6 (3):379-385.
    The debate over the genetic testing of minors has developed into a major bioethical topic. Although several controversial questions remain unanswered, a degree of consensus has been reached regarding the policies on genetic testing of minors. Recently, several commentators have suggested that these policies are overly restrictive, too narrow in focus, and even in conflict with the limited empirical evidence that exists on this issue. We respond to these arguments in this paper, by first offering a clarification of three key (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations