American Journal of Bioethics 4 (2):21 – 28 (2004)

Authors
Colin Farrelly
Queen's University
Abstract
In the newly emerging debates about genetics and justice three distinct principles have begun to emerge concerning what the distributive aim of genetic interventions should be. These principles are: genetic equality, a genetic decent minimum, and the genetic difference principle. In this paper, I examine the rationale of each of these principles and argue that genetic equality and a genetic decent minimum are ill-equipped to tackle what I call the currency problem and the problem of weight. The genetic difference principle is the most promising of the three principles and I develop this principle so that it takes seriously the concerns of just health care and distributive justice in general. Given the strains on public funds for other important social programmes, the costs of pursuing genetic interventions and the nature of genetic interventions, I conclude that a more lax interpretation of the genetic difference principle is appropriate. This interpretation stipulates that genetic inequalities should be arranged so that they are to the greatest reasonable benefit of the least advantaged. Such a proposal is consistent with prioritarianism and provides some practical guidance for non-ideal societies–that is, societies that do not have the endless amount of resources needed to satisfy every requirement of justice.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1162/152651604323097952
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 57,156
External links

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

What is the Point of Equality?Elizabeth Anderson - 1999 - Ethics 109 (2):287-337.
Anarchy, State, and Utopia.Robert Nozick - 1974 - Philosophy 52 (199):102-105.
Just Health Care.Norman Daniels - 1985 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Enhancement, Biomedical.Thomas Douglas - 2013 - In Hugh LaFollette (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell.
Enhancing Equality.Alberto Giubilini & Francesca Minerva - 2019 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 44 (3):335-354.
Luck, Genes, and Equality.Dov Fox - 2007 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 35 (4):712-726.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
77 ( #129,743 of 2,411,758 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #346,023 of 2,411,758 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes