Cesagen School of Social Science, Cardiff University, UK.
Soc Stud Sci. 2010 Apr;40(2):163-86. doi: 10.1177/0306312709349781.
Over the past few years, considerable interest has been paid to the way in which social expectations (hopes, hypes, fears) about new genomic technologies help shape, and in themselves are shaped by, emerging technologies, regulatory regimes and social concerns. In comparison, little attention has been paid to the role of expectations in related, but non-scientific discourses, such as bioethics. Drawing on a review of publications addressing the ethical issues associated with pharmacogenetics, this paper presents a detailed critique of bioethicists' contribution to these debates. The review highlights how, almost a decade after bioethical debate around pharmacogenetics started, and in contrast to the profession's self-perception as a form of regulator, bioethicists still largely restrict themselves to reviews of possible ethical issues raised by this technology, rather than critiquing others' positions and arguing for specific points of view. In addition the paper argues that bioethicists tend to: accept unquestioningly scientists' expectations about the development and ethical issues raised by pharmacogenetics; ignore contributions from bioethicists who do question these expectations; and engage in an ethical debate, the boundaries of which have been laid down and defined by academic and industry scientists. The paper concludes by offering some possible explanations for why the bioethical discourse has taken this form.
在过去的几年中，人们对社会对新基因组技术的期望（希望、炒作、恐惧）如何帮助塑造新兴技术、监管机制和社会关注的方式产生了浓厚的兴趣。相比之下，人们对期望在相关但非科学话语中的作用关注甚少，例如生物伦理学。本文通过对涉及与药物遗传学相关的伦理问题的出版物进行回顾，对生物伦理学家在这些辩论中的贡献进行了详细的批判。该评论强调了在药物遗传学的生物伦理辩论开始近十年后，与该专业将自身视为监管形式的自我认知形成鲜明对比的是，生物伦理学家仍然主要局限于对该技术提出的可能的伦理问题进行审查，而不是批判他人的立场并为特定观点辩护。此外，本文认为生物伦理学家往往：毫无质疑地接受科学家对药物遗传学的发展和伦理问题的期望；忽略那些对这些期望提出质疑的生物伦理学家的贡献；并参与到一个由学术和行业科学家设定和定义界限的伦理辩论中。本文最后提出了一些可能的解释，说明为什么生物伦理话语采取了这种形式。
