Scientific responsibility for the dissemination and interpretation of genetic research: lessons from the ?warrior gene? controversy
Keywords
AttitudesCodes Of Ethics
Ethics
Genetic Research
Genetics
Research
Researchers
Responsibilities
Science
Violence
Genetics and Human Ancestry
Behavioral Research
Research on Special Populations
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
http://www.jmedethics.comhttp://xr8el9yb8v.search.serialssolutions.com/?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Scientific+responsibility+for+the+dissemination+and+interpretation+of+genetic+research:+lessons+from+the+?warrior+gene?+controversy&title=Journal+of+Medical+Ethics&volume=34&issue=6&date=20080600&au=Wensley,+D.;+King,+M.
http://hdl.handle.net/10822/512973
Abstract
This paper discusses the announcement by a team of researchers that they identified a genetic influence for a range of "antisocial" behaviours in the New Zealand M?ori population (dubbed the "warrior gene"). The behaviours included criminality, violence, gambling and alcoholism. The reported link between genetics and behaviour met with much controversy. The scientists were described as hiding behind a veneer of supposedly "objective" western science, using it to perpetuate "racist and oppressive discourses". In this paper we examine what went wrong in the dissemination of the research. We chose as our framework the debate around the "internal/external" responsibilities of scientists. Using this discourse we argue that when the researchers ventured to explain their research in terms of social phenomena, they assumed a duty to ensure that their findings were placed "in context". By "in context", we argue that evidence of any genetic influence on behavioural characteristics should not be reported in isolation, but instead presented alongside other environmental, cultural and socio-economic influences that may also contribute to the studied behaviour. Rather than imposing a new obligation on scientists, we find this duty to contextualise results is in keeping with the spirit of codes of ethics already in place. Lessons from the "warrior gene" controversy may assist researchers elsewhere to identify potential areas of conflict before they jeopardise research relationships, or disseminate findings in a manner that fuels misleading and/or potentially discriminatory attitudes in society.Date
2011-07-12Identifier
oai:repository.library.georgetown.edu:10822/512973http://www.jmedethics.com
Journal of Medical Ethics 2008 June; 34(6): 507-509
http://xr8el9yb8v.search.serialssolutions.com/?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Scientific+responsibility+for+the+dissemination+and+interpretation+of+genetic+research:+lessons+from+the+?warrior+gene?+controversy&title=Journal+of+Medical+Ethics&volume=34&issue=6&date=20080600&au=Wensley,+D.;+King,+M.
http://hdl.handle.net/10822/512973
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Multi-sectoral data linkage for intervention and policy evaluationLyons, Ronan (2016-07-05)
-
DATA QUALITY IN CROSS-NATIONAL SURVEY. The Quality Indicators Response Rate, Nonresponse Bias and Fieldwork EffortsHalbherr, Verena (2016-07-05)
-
Trialling a new Survey Project Management Portal on the European Values Study 2017Brislinger, Evelyn; Kurti, Dafina; Davari, Masoud; Klas, Claus-Peter (2018-07-03)