Abstract
Senior molecular geneticists were interviewed about their perceptions of the ethical and social implications of genetic knowledge. Inductive analysis of these interviews identified a number of strategies through which the scientists negotiated their moral responsibilities as they participated in generating knowledge that presents difficult ethical questions. These strategies included: further analysis and application of scientific method; clarification of multiple roles; negotiation with the public through public debate, institutional processes of funding, ethics committees and legislation; and personal responsibility.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Touchette, N. (1995) Genetics and Crime Conference Reaps Subtle Benefit, Nature medicine 1: 1108–1109.
Anon. (1995) Crime Against Genetics, Nature Genetics 11: 223–4.
Gottfried, K. & Wilson, K. (1997) Science as a social construct, Nature 386: 545–547.
Marteau, T. & Richards, M. (1996) The Troubled Helix: social and psychological implications of the new human genetics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hubbard, R. & Ward, E. (1993) Exploding the Gene Myth, Beacon Press, Boston.
Rothman, B. K. (1998) Genetic Maps and Human Imaginations, W. W. Norton and Company, New York.
Kevles, D. & Hodd, L. (1992) The Code of Codes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Kerr, A., Cunningham-Burley, S. & Amos, A. (1997) The new genetics: professionals’ discurcive boundaries, Sociological Review 45: 279–303.
Michaelis, A. R. & Harvey, H. (1973) Scientists in search of their conscience, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.
Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994) Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks London Greater Kailash).
Guidelines for Researchers on Health Research involving Maori (1998) Health Research Council of New Zealand.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nicholas, B. Molecular geneticists and moral responsibility: “maybe if we were working on the atom bomb I would have a different argument”. SCI ENG ETHICS 5, 515–530 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-999-0052-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-999-0052-3