Marginalizing Experience: A Critical Analysis of Public Discourse Surrounding Stem Cell Research in Australia (2005–6) [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 8 (2):191-202 (2011)
Over the past decade, stem cell science has generated considerable public and political debate. These debates tend to focus on issues concerning the protection of nascent human life and the need to generate medical and therapeutic treatments for the sick and vulnerable. The framing of the public debate around these issues not only dichotomises and oversimplifies the issues at stake, but tends to marginalise certain types of voices, such as the women who donate their eggs and/or embryos to stem cell research and the patients who might benefit from its potential clinical outcomes. This paper draws on empirical research conducted on a recent stem cell policy episode in Australia. From the qualitative examination of 109 newspaper opinion editorials and twenty-three in-depth interviews, it is argued that these voices are marginalised because they are based on discourses that have less epistemological status in public debate. Our results suggest that the personal experiences of women and patients are marginalised by the alliances that form between more powerful discourse communities that use science as a source of authority and legitimation. It is argued that members of these communities establish legitimacy and assert authority in public debate by discursively deploying science in claims that marginalise other epistemologies. Implications are discussed along with suggestions for a more enriched and inclusive public debate
|Keywords||Stem cells Cloning Bioethics Public policy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Jürgen Habermas (1991). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry Into a Category of Bourgeois Society. The MIT Press.
Charles Murdoch & Christopher Thomas Scott (2010). Stem Cell Tourism and the Power of Hope. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (5):16-23.
Alan Irwin (2003). Science, Social Theory and Public Knowledge. Open University Press.
John Miles Little (2010). Is There a Real Nexus Between Ethics and Aesthetics? Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (1):91-102.
Catherine Waldby & Brian Salter (2008). Global Governance in Human Embryonic Stem Cell Science: Standardisation and Bioethics in Research and Patenting. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2 (1).
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Tamra Lysaght & Alastair V. Campbell (2013). Broadening the Scope of Debates Around Stem Cell Research. Bioethics 27 (5):251-256.
Tamra Lysaght, Rachel A. Ankeny & Ian Kerridge (2006). The Scope of Public Discourse Surrounding Proposition 71: Looking Beyond the Moral Status of the Embryo. [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 3 (1-2):109-119.
Rebecca Dresser (2010). Stem Cell Research as Innovation: Expanding the Ethical and Policy Conversation. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 38 (2):332-341.
Ronald K. F. Fung & Ian H. Kerridge (2013). Uncertain Translation, Uncertain Benefit and Uncertain Risk: Ethical Challenges Facing First-in-Human Trials of Induced Pluripotent Stem (Ips) Cells. Bioethics 27 (2):89-96.
Françoise Baylis & Carolyn McLeod (2007). The Stem Cell Debate Continues: The Buying and Selling of Eggs for Research. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (12):726-731.
Matthew Herder & Jennifer Dyck Brian (2008). Canada's Stem Cell Corporation: Aggregate Concerns and the Question of Public Trust. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 77 (1):73 - 84.
O. Carter Snead (2012). The Law and Politics of Embryo Research in America. Human Reproduction and Genetic Ethics 17 (1):40-52.
Aaron D. Levine & Leslie E. Wolf (2012). The Roles and Responsibilities of Physicians in Patients' Decisions About Unproven Stem Cell Therapies. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 40 (1):122-134.
Jan P. Beckmann (2004). On the German Debate on Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (5):603 – 621.
Nikolaus Knoepffler (2004). Stem Cell Research: An Ethical Evaluation of Policy Options. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (1):55-74.
LeRoy Walters (2004). Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Intercultural Perspective. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (1):3-38.
William M. Sage (2010). Will Embryonic Stem Cells Change Health Policy? Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 38 (2):342-351.
Jackie Leach Scully & Christoph Rehmann-Sutter (2006). Creating Donors: The 2005 Swiss Law on Donation of 'Spare' Embryos to hESC Research. [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 3 (1-2):81-93.
Insoo Hyun (2008). Review of K. R. Monroe, R. B. Miller, and J. Tobis. Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical and Political Issues . Review of C. B. Cohen. Renewing the Stuff of Life: Stem Cells, Ethics, and Public Policy . Review of R. Korobkin with S. R. Munzer. Stem Cell Century: Law and Policy for a Breakthrough Technology. [REVIEW] American Journal of Bioethics 8 (6):57 – 59.
Mark T. Brown (2009). Moral Complicity in Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 19 (1):pp. 1-22.
Added to index2011-03-25
Total downloads10 ( #235,035 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #369,877 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?