‘We have seen the geneticisation of society.’ Discuss the arguments for and against this statement.
Hi writer! For this task, please answer the essay title above in 1500 words. This is a critical piece. So have an argument/thesis that signposts whether you disagree or agree with the above statement (e.g. this essay will argue that …) and then whatever position you argue, still go on to discuss both for and against (e.g. in order to argue this position, the essay will first … second … third … etc ). Again, be critical, so whichever side of the fence you decide to sit on, you need to counteract that viewpoint with equally backed up statements from the opposite viewpoint. How this clash of for and against is structured, alongside whichever point of view you decide to support based on the readings I will provide, is completely up to your jurisdiction!
Please make sure you use and incorporate ALL the below 6 readings(I have attached these in 7 different documents):
1) Heath, Deborah, Rayna. Rapp and Karen-Sue. Taussig. 2004. Genetic citizenship. In Nugent and Vincent eds. A companion to the anthropology of politics, 152-167. Oxford: Blackwell.
2) Callon, M. & Rabeharisoa, V. (2004) Gino’s lesson on humanity: genetics, mutual entanglements and the sociologist’s role. Economy and Society, 33 (1), pp.1–27.
3) Rose, Nikolas. 2007. The politics of life itself: biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Chapters 4 and 5.
4) Lippman, Abby. (1991). Prenatal genetic testing and screening: constructing needs and reinforcing inequities. American Journal of Law and Medicine 1: 15–50.
5) Weiner Kate, et al. 2017. Have we seen the geneticisation of society? Expectations and evidence. Sociology of Health and Illness, 39(7): 989-1004.
6) Mikami, Koichi. 2020. Citizens under the umbrella: citizenship projects and the development of genetic umbrella organisations in the USA and the UK. New Genetics and Society 39:2, 148-172.
And if needs be here are extra readings to help you implement additional information:
Ten Have, H. (2012). Geneticization: Concept. In: Encyclopaedia of Life Sciences (eLS): http://www.els.net.
Rapp, R., Heath, D. & Taussig, K.S. (2001) Genealogical disease: where hereditary abnormality, biomedical explanation, and family responsibility meet. In: S. Franklin & S. MacKinnon, eds. Relative Matters: New Directions in the Study of Kinship. Durham: Duke University Press.
Rapp, R. (2003) Cell life and death, child life and death: genomic horizons, genetic diseases, family stories. In: S. Franklin & M. Lock, eds. Remaking life and death: toward an anthropology of the biosciences. Sante Fe: School of American Research Press.
Rapp, R. (2000) Testing Women, testing the fetus: the social impact of amniocentesis in America. New York: Routledge.
Hedgecoe, A. (2001) Schizophrenia and the narrative of enlightened geneticization. Social Studies of Science 31/ 6: 875–911.
Novas, C. and Rose, N. (2000). Genetic risk and the birth of the somatic individual. Economy and Society 29/ 4: 485–513.
Rabinow, P. (1992). Artificiality and enlightenment: from sociobiology to biosociality. In: Crary J., and Kwinter, S. (eds), Incorporations. New York: Zone. 234-252.
Novas, C. 2006. The political economy of hope: patients’ organizations, science and biovalue. BioSocieties 1: 289-305.
Rabeharisoa, V. 2003. The struggle against neuromuscular diseases in France and the emergence of the ‘partnership model’ of patient organisation. Social Science and Medicine 57: 2127-2136.
Gibbon, S. and C. Novas. 2007. Biosocialities, genetics and the social sciences: making biologies and identities. London: Routledge. ‘Introduction’.
Clarke, A.E., Shim, J.K., Shostak, S., and Nelson, A. (2009). Biomedicalising genetic health, diseases, and identities. In: Atkinson, P., Glasner, P., and Lock, M. (eds) Handbook of Genetics and Society: Mapping the New Genomic Era, New York: Routledge. 2009. 21-40.
Extra things the Professor advised to make sure is done:
– Incorporate concepts of ‘geneticisation’ and ‘genetic citizenship’ (get definitions from main readings)
– Have clear subheadings for every section.
– Discuss examples from the readings to marshal the argument you want to make
Useful Lecture Notes:
• Geneticisation – First articulated by Abby Lippman (1991): “An ongoing process by which differences between individuals are reduced to their DNA codes, with most disorders, behaviours and psychological variations defined, at least in part, as genetic in origin. It refers as well to the process by which interventions employing genetic technologies are adopted to manage problems of health. Through this process, human biology is incorrectly equated with human genetics, implying that the latter acts alone to make us each the organism she or he is.”
• Geneticisation -Key features of Lippman’s thesis:
o Genetics as dominant popular and professional discourse about health and disease
o Reductionist and deterministic
o Key basis for understanding difference, identity: stratifies society along genetic lines
o Impacts on values and attitudes, risk, responsibility, and how health managed
o Stresses importance of genetic research for future health improvements
o Casts clinical genetics as a powerful discipline (Weiner et al. 2017)
• Hedgecoe (2001): –how does geneticisation take place, and is it necessarily negative?
–calls for empirical research
• Novas and Rose (2010): critique of geneticisation misplaced –People have agency
–Genetic information both individualising and collectivising
• Rose (2007) critiques concept of geneticisation: not a new form of ‘subjection’ but rather ‘the creation of subjects that is at stake here’ (pg 110)
