Genophobia: What Is Wrong with Genetic Discrimination?

Diver, Colin S.; Cohen, Jane Maslow

doi:10.2307/3312965

Cited by 23 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A strikingly low number of respondents expressed acceptance of genetic discrimination by employers (question 3). Evidently the vast majority rejected the utilitarian justification centered on the expense of caring for the genetically infirm (Diver and Cohen 2001).…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex Differences in the Acceptability of Discrimination

Kuran

McCaffery

2008

Political Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large telephone survey conducted after the attacks of September 11, 2001, suggests that the willingness to tolerate discrimination varies significantly across domains, with a very high tolerance of discrimination against poorly educated immigrants and a strikingly low tolerance of discrimination against the genetically disadvantaged. Regardless of domain, tolerance is greater among men than among women. A survey conducted simultaneously over the World Wide Web, using volunteer panels, replicated the phone survey results and revealed an even larger sex gap. This finding suggests that a social desirability bias leads women to overstate and men to understate their tolerance of discrimination in public.

show abstract

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex Differences in the Acceptability of Discrimination

Kuran

McCaffery

2008

Political Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The new genetic era and forms of subtle eugenics therefore give rise to public policy concerns and signal the need to anticipate the creation of a genetic underclass in society and respond to these issues [96]. The rise of a genetic underclass raises serious ethical and public policy concerns [97]. Advancing genetic technologies, and uncontrolled use of such technologies may lead to societal intolerance of disability and genetic difference.…”

Section: Genetics and A New Age Of Eugenicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precision Medicine and Advancing Genetic Technologies—Disability and Human Rights Perspectives

Paor

Blanck

2016

Laws

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific and technological developments are propelling genetics and genetic technologies into the public sphere. Scientific and technological innovation is becoming more refined, resulting in an increase in the availability and use of genetic testing, and other cutting edge genetic technologies, including gene editing. These genetic advances not only signal a growing trend towards precision medicine, but also provoke consideration of the protection of genetic information as an emerging human rights concern. Particular ethical and legal issues arise from a disability perspective, including the potential for discrimination and privacy violations. In consideration of the intersection of genetics and disability, this article highlights the significant concerns raised as genetic science and technology advances, and the consequences for disability rights, particularly the core concepts of non-discrimination, and respect for diversity and difference. On examining international human rights perspectives, it looks particularly at the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and how it may be used to guide best practice in this area. With an acknowledgement of historical abuses of genetic science, this article highlights the need to maintain caution as to the potential consequences of advancing genetic technologies on persons with disabilities and indeed on society as a whole.

show abstract

“…Some have argued that this possibility supports ''genetic transparency'' where both parties should have access to such information. 8 A third argument that might be used to support the use of genetic screening or testing in employment, in at least some situations, arises where this has the potential to be in the broader ''public interest''. One might imagine a situation in which the genetic screening of employees might be of relevance to public safety.…”

Section: Ethical Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%