“Non-carriers also sometimes express guilt at not sharing their families’ risk of disease, thereby demonstrating responsibility through compassion.” (Arribus-Allyson et all 2008)
Back with the guilty survivor, and now responsility is attributed to what we would normally consider to be simply a kind, humane emotion. But can compassion really be seen a form of responsible behaviour??
Going back to “On Being Genetically “Irresponsible” (Andre, Fleck, Tomlinson 2000) one of the key arguments revolves around the theory that responsibility is considered somehow a character attribute rather than a form of action, and therefor accusing someone for being irresponsible is a critique of their personality rather than their behaviour.
“It is not just an [...]
Tagged blame, category, character, moral, personalityIs fatalism a positive or negative approach to genetically predicted illness? All forms of fatalistic belief, exempt the individual from any personal responsibility, intentions or free will. However can we even use fatalism as a legitimate approach in light of genetic knowledge? Before genetic testing, there was no way to know exactly which genes one [...]
Tagged belief, family, fatalism, predeterminedQuestions regarding the perception of personal responsibility arise from the difference in attitude between tested carriers and non-carriers of genetic mutation. The paper “Guilt, blame and responsibility: men’s understanding of their role in the transmission of BRCA1/2 mutations within their family” (Hallowell et al 2006) brings together the accounts of men who were tested positive [...]
Tagged BRCA, carrier, perceptionAre parents now responsible for the genetic endowment of their future children? If so, is the responsibility causal, moral, or both? To what extent should parents take responsibility in this arena? Would doing so involve shouldering a burden, admitting blame, taking preemptive action, or something else?
(Andre, Fleck, Tomlinson, On Being Genetically “Irresponsible”, 2000)