Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ethics or Morals: Understanding Students’ Values Related to Genetic Tests on Humans

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To make meaning of scientific knowledge in such a way that concepts and values of the life-world are not threatened is difficult for students and laymen. Ethics and morals pertaining to the use of genetic tests for hereditary diseases have been investigated and discussed by educators, anthropologists, medical doctors and philosophers giving, at least in part, diverging results. This study investigates how students explain and understand their argumentation about dilemmas concerning gene testing for the purpose to reduce hereditary diseases. Thirteen students were interviewed about their views on this issue. Qualitative analysis was done primarily by relating students’ argumentation to their movements between ethics and morals as opposing poles. Students used either objective or subjective knowledge but had difficulties to integrate them. They tried to negotiate ethic arguments using utilitarian motives and medical knowledge with sympathy or irrational and personal arguments. They discussed the embryo’s moral status to decide if it was replaceable in a social group or not. The educational implications of the students’ use of knowledge in personal arguments are discussed.

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

References

  • Aikenhead GS, Jegede OJ (1999) Cross-cultural science education: a cognitive explanation of a cultural phenomenon. J Res Sci Teach 36(3):269–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batson CD, Sager K, Garst E, Kang M, Rubchinsky K, Dawson K (1997) Is empathy-induced helping due to self-other merging? J Pers Soc Psychol 73(3):495–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauman Z (1994) Postmodern ethics. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Bencze JL (2000) Democratic constructivist science education: enabling egalitarian literacy and self-actualization. J Curric Stud 32(6):847–865

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook RJ, Dickens BM (2003) Human rights dynamics of abortion law reform. Hum Rights Q 25:1–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson VM (2003) Effect of a forensic DNA testing module on adolescents’ ethical decision-making abilities. Aust Sci Teach J 49(4):12–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson VM (2007) An exploration of high school (12–17 year old) students’ understandings of, attitudes towards biotechnology processes. Res Sci Educ 37:59–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich H, Schibeci R (2003) Beyond public perceptions of gene technology: community participation in public policy in Australia. Public Underst Sci 12:381–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farver JM, Branstetter WH (1994) Preschoolers’ prosocial responses to their peers’ distress. Dev Psychol 30(3):334–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giddens A (1990) The consequences of modernity. Polity Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan C (1982) In a different voice: psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Gollust SE, Thompson RE, Gooding HC, Biesecker BB (2003) Living with achondroplasia: attitudes toward population screening and correlation with quality of life. Prenat Diagn 23:1003–1008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijs WJM, Midden CJH, Drabbe RAJ (1993) Biotechnology, attitudes and influence factors. Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurlbut WB (2005) Altered nuclear transfer as a morally acceptable means for the procurement of human embryonic stem cells. Perspect Biol Med 48(2):211–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jallinoja P, Aro AR (2000) Does knowledge make a difference? The association between knowledge about genes and attitudes toward gene tests. J Health Commun 5:29–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Jegede O (1995) Collateral learning and the eco-cultural paradigm in science and mathematics education in Africa. Stud Sci Educ 25:97–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly J (1995) Public perceptions of genetic engineering: Australia 1994. Biotechnology Section, Australian Department of Industry, Science and Technology

  • Kohlberg L (1969) Stage and sequence: the cognitive development approach to socialization. In: Goslin DA (ed) Handbook of socialization theory. Rand McNally, Chicago, pp 347–480

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg (1981) Essays on moral development, vol. 1: the philosophy of moral development. Harper & Row, New York

  • Konrad M (2003) Predictive genetic testing and the making of the pre-symptomatic person: prognostic moralities amongst Huntington’s-affected families. Anthropol Med 10(1):23–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krebs DL, Denton KL, Vermeulen SC, Carpendale JI, Bush A (1991) Structured flexibility of moral judgment. J Pers Soc Psychol 61(6):1012–1023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln YS, Guba E (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage, Beverly Hills

    Google Scholar 

  • Longbottom JE, Butler PH (1999) Why teach science? Setting rational goals for science education. Sci & Educ 83:473–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menzel P, Dolan P, Richardson J, Olsen JA (2002) The role of adaption to disability and disease in health state valuation: a preliminary normative analysis. Soc Sci Med 55:2149–2158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Middleton A, Hewison J, Muller RF (1998) Attitudes of deaf adults toward genetic testing for hereditary deafness. Am J Hum Genet 63:1175–1180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milner KK, Collins EE, Connors GR, Petty EM (1998) Attitudes of young adults to prenatal screening and genetic correction for human attributes and psychiatric conditions. Am J Med Genet 76:111–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milunsky A, Fletcher JC (1978) Prenatal diagnosis: clinical and ethical aspects. In: Reich WT (ed) Encyclopedia of bioethics. Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols S (2004) Sentimental rules: on the natural foundations of moral judgment. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris SP (1997) Intellectual independence for nonscientists and other content-transcendent goals of science education. Sci & Educ 81:239–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parens E, Asch A (2003) Disability rights critique of prenatal genetic testing: reflections and recommendations. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 9:40–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlova M (2005) Social change: how should technology education respond? Int J Technol Des Educ 15:199–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rest J, Narvaez D, Bebeau M, Thoma S (1999) A neo-Kohlbergian approach: the DIT and schema theory. Educ Psychol Rev 11(4):291–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler TD, Fowler SR (2006) A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Sci & Educ 90:986–1004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler TD, Zeidler DL (2004) The morality of socioscientific issues: construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Sci & Educ 88:4–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandelowski M, Jones LC (1996) Healing fictions: stories of choosing in the aftermath if the detection of fetal anomalies. Soc Sci Med 42(3):353–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon S, Erduran S, Osborne J (2006) Learning to teach argumentation: research and development in the classroom. Int J Sci Educ 28(2–3):235–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson C (1944) Ethics and language. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Stich S, Weinberg J (2001) Jackson’s empirical assumptions. Philos Phenomenol Res 62(3):637–643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strassberg B (2005) Fortieth anniversary symposium: science, religion and secularity in a technological society. Zygon 40(2):307–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Styles MLB (2002) Using education as a public relations tool for biotechnology. Plant Cell Tiss Organ Cult 70:23–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugarman J (2005) Persons and moral agency. Theory Psychol 15(6):793–811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddington SN, Kramer MG, Hernandez-Alcoceba R, Buckley SK, Themis M, Coutelle C, Prieto J (2005) In utero gene therapy: current challenges and perspectives. Mol Ther 11:661–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wall LL, Brown D (2006) Regarding zygotes as persons: implications for public policy. Perspect Biol Med 49(4):602–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams B (1973) Morality and the emotions. In: Problems of the self. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 207–229

  • Williams B (1985) Ethics and the limits of philosophy. Fontana, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler DL, Sadler TD, Simmons ML, Howes EV (2005) Beyond STS: a research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Sci & Educ 89:357–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar A, Nemet F (2002) Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. J Res Sci Teach 39(1):35–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Faculty of Natural Science and Technology and the Board of Teacher Training and Educational Research at Kalmar University. I would also like to thank Dr. Anne-Mari Folkesson for stimulating discussions throughout the writing process of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Pure and Applied Natural Sciences, University of Kalmar, Barlastgatan 11, Kalmar, 39182, Sweden

    Mats Gunnar Lindahl

Authors
  1. Mats Gunnar Lindahl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mats Gunnar Lindahl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lindahl, M.G. Ethics or Morals: Understanding Students’ Values Related to Genetic Tests on Humans. Sci & Educ 18, 1285–1311 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-008-9148-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-008-9148-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation