After ten years of debate Directive 98/44/EG on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions was adopted in 1998. This directive takes decisions on some controversial bioethical and legal issues and offers the European biotech industries more space to develop their inventions, but leaves a number of philosophical and moral issues unresolved. This paper distinguishes between different layers in the debate and maps its modes of argumentation. Major philosophical, ethical and conceptual issues are located. It is argued that further analysis of (...) these issues can help resolve further ethical and legal difficulties as regards patenting of human DNA. As the allegedly special status of genetic material remains unclear, the status of (human) DNA and its relation to the human body and personal identity should be further explored. (shrink)

ABSTRACTThis commentary questions the presumption in genetic research that a biological connection exists between populations identified as Jewish. The author emphasises that identifying individuals as Jewish based on biological criteria is a sociological process that can draw attention away from other social mechanisms affecting identity construction. She also encourages critical consideration of the possible racialised thinking behind genetic anthropology studies, and the language used to express genetic findings. In conclusion, she calls for a radical cultural shift in the kind of (...) knowledge valued as significant, relevant, and beneficial to the people on whom genetic ancestry studies are carried out and she asks for attention to the political contexts surrounding all such research. (shrink)

This commentary questions the presumption in genetic research that a biological connection exists between populations identified as Jewish. The author emphasises that identifying individuals as Jewish based on biological criteria is a sociological process that can draw attention away from other social mechanisms affecting identity construction. She also encourages critical consideration of the possible racialised thinking behind genetic anthropology studies, and the language used to express genetic findings. In conclusion, she calls for a radical cultural shift in the kind of (...) knowledge valued as significant, relevant, and beneficial to the people on whom genetic ancestry studies are carried out and she asks for attention to the political contexts surrounding all such research. (shrink)