Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reflections on genetic manipulation and duties to posterity: An engagement with Skene and Coady

  • Article
  • Published:
Monash Bioethics Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In addressing the regulation of human genetic futures, scientific standards concerning human kinds are endorsed by philosophical approaches that tend to exclude many people with genetic conditions from the deliberative process. In broadening the axiological, ontological and epistemological framework to include disability perspectives, the focus is shifted from questions of regulation to practical matters of participation, invoking ideals of community equality and enabled choice. In developing practical community engagements to deliberate upon genetic futures, a process that allows dialectical encounter between eugenic and non-eugenic approaches is envisioned so that strong versions of eugenics are avoided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Published References

  • Allen, GE. Science misapplied: the eugenics age revisited. Technology Review. Aug/Sept 1966, v99n6

  • ALRC-NHMRC, Protection of Human Genetic Information, Discussion Paper 66, Commonwealth of Australia, 2002

  • Anderson, E. What is the point of equality? Ethics, Chicago, Jan 1999

  • Beauchamp, G. The Dystopian Theodicy of Parson Malthus, Humanitas, Fall 2000 vl3 p54

  • Burnheim, J. Is Democracy Possible?: the alternative to electoral politics. Cambridge: Polity, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  • Galton, F. Eugenics, its definition, scope and aims, in Essays in Eugenics, The Eugenics Society, London, 1909, (36)

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. Is there a coherent social conception of disability? Journal of Medical Ethics, April 2000 v26 i2 p95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, P. Practical Genetic Counselling, Butterworth-Heinemann 1999

  • Lavazzi, T. The global subject in an electronic age: Re(x) locating the critical self.symploke, Wntr — Spring 2001 p83(20)

  • Lewis, CS. The Abolition of Man, MacMillan, 1965

  • Mills, C. Choice and Circumstance, Ethics, Vol 109, no.1, 1998, 154–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • More, M. On becoming posthuman. Free Inquiry, Fall 1994 v14 n4 p38 (4)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, N. Optimalisai and Axiological Metaphysics, The Review of Metaphysics, June 2000 v53 i4 p807

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakespeare, T. Choices and Rights: eugenics, genetics and disability equality, Disability and Society, Vol 13. No. 5, 1998, 665–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, B. (Comments on) F. Galton, “Eugenics, its definition, scope and aims,” in Sociological Papers, 1, Macmillan, London, 1905

    Google Scholar 

  • Skene, L and Coady, CAJ. Genetic manipulation and our duty to posterity, Monash Bioethics Review Vol. 21 No 2 April 2002

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Queensland, Australia

    David Turnbull (Bioethics worker Queensland Advocacy Incorporated, and doctoral student in Contemporary Studies)

Authors
  1. David Turnbull
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Turnbull, D. Reflections on genetic manipulation and duties to posterity: An engagement with Skene and Coady. Monash Bioethics Review 21, 10–31 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03351283

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03351283

Keywords

Search

Navigation