Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 4
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    CAMPORESI, SILVIA and MAUGERI, PAOLO 2011. Genetic Enhancement in Sports: The Role of Reason and Private Rationalities in the Public Arena. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Vol. 20, Issue. 02, p. 248.

    COGGON, JOHN 2011. Guest Editorial: On Method and Resolution in Philosophical Bioethics. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Vol. 20, Issue. 02, p. 159.

    HARRIS, JOHN 2011. The Challenge of Nonconfrontational Ethics. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Vol. 20, Issue. 02, p. 204.

    HÄYRY, MATTI 2011. Rationality and the Genetic Challenge Revisited. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Vol. 20, Issue. 03, p. 468.

  • Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Volume 20, Issue 1
  • January 2011, pp. 46-55

Confrontations in “Genethics”: Rationalities, Challenges, and Methodological Responses


It was only a matter of time before the portmanteau term “genethics” would be coined and a whole field within bioethics delineated. The term can be dated back at least to 1984 and the work of James Nagle, who claims credit for inventing the word, which he takes “to incorporate the various ethical implications and dilemmas generated by genetic engineering with the technologies and applications that directly or indirectly affect the human species.” In Nagle’s phrase, “Genethic issues are instances where medical genetics and biotechnology generate ethical problems that warrant societal deliberation.” The great promises and terrific threats of developments in scientific understanding of genetics, and the power to enhance, modify, or profit from the knowledge science breeds, naturally offer a huge range of issues to vex moral philosophers and social theorists. Issues as diverse as embryo selection and the quest for immortality continue to tax analysts, who offer reasons as varied as the matters that might be dubbed “genethical” for or against the morality of things that are actually possible, logically possible, and even just tenuously probable science fiction.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

R Baldwin , J Black . Really responsive regulation. Modern Law Review 2008;71(1):59–94.

S Holm . If you have said A, you must also say B: Is this always true? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2004;13(2):179–84.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
  • ISSN: 0963-1801
  • EISSN: 1469-2147
  • URL: /core/journals/cambridge-quarterly-of-healthcare-ethics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *