The scope of public discourse surrounding proposition 71: Looking beyond the moral status of the embryo [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 3 (1-2):109-119 (2006)
Human embryonic stem cell research has generated considerable discussion and debate in bioethics. Bioethical discourse tends to focus on the moral status of the embryo as the central issue, however, and it is unclear how much this reflects broader community values and beliefs related to stem cell research. This paper presents the results of a study which aims to identify and classify the issues and arguments that have arisen in public discourse associated with one prominent policy episode in the United States: the 2004 Californian Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative (also known as Proposition 71). The findings show that public discourse about Proposition 71 is characterised by a broader range of issues than those usually addressed in scholarly publications and public policy documents. While attention to the moral status of the embryo is an important issue in stem cell research, making it the main focus of public discourse has a polarising effect. This also limits opportunities to identify shared values, understand how political alliances are forged, and develop social consensus. Implications for future research and policy are discussed.
|Keywords||Stem cells Public policy Mass media United States of America Bioethics|
|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
LeRoy Walters (2004). Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Intercultural Perspective. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (1):3-38.
Søren Holm (2002). Going to the Roots of the Stem Cell Controversy. Bioethics 16 (6):493–507.
Jürgen Habermas & William Outhwaite (1996). The Habermas Reader. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
Citations of this work BETA
Jane Maienschein, Mary Sunderland, Rachel A. Ankeny & Jason Scott Robert (2008). The Ethos and Ethics of Translational Research. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (3):43 – 51.
Similar books and articles
H. M. Malm (1989). Commodification or Compensation: A Reply to Ketchum. Hypatia 4 (3):128 - 135.
Dale Hample, Bing Han & David Payne (2010). The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments. Argumentation 24 (4):405-421.
Peter J. Taylor (1994). Shifting Frames: From Divided to Distributed Psychologies of Scientific Agents. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:304 - 310.
J. L. Schellenberg (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (II). Religious Studies 41 (3):287 - 303.
H. E. Baber (1987). How Bad Is Rape? Hypatia 2 (2):125 - 138.
Tamra Lysaght, John Little & Ian Kerridge (2011). Marginalizing Experience: A Critical Analysis of Public Discourse Surrounding Stem Cell Research in Australia (2005–6). [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 8 (2):191-202.
P. X. Monaghan (2010). A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads19 ( #144,871 of 1,725,153 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #268,621 of 1,725,153 )
How can I increase my downloads?