nach oben

Journal of Genetic Counseling

Erschienen in:

07.12.2015 | Original Research

The Moral Reasoning of Genetic Dilemmas Amongst Jewish Israeli Undergraduate Students with Different Religious Affiliations and Scientific Backgrounds

verfasst von: Merav Siani, Orit Ben-Zvi Assaraf

Erschienen in: Journal of Genetic Counseling | Ausgabe 3/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The main objective of this study was to shed light on the moral reasoning of undergraduate Israeli students towards genetic dilemmas, and on how these are affected by their religious affiliation, by the field they study and by their gender. An open ended questionnaire was distributed among 449 undergraduate students in institutions of higher education in Israel, and their answers were analyzed according to the framework described by Sadler and Zeidler (Science Education, 88(1), 4–27, 2004). They were divided into two major categories: those whose reasoning was based on the consideration of moral consequences (MC), and those who supported their opinion by citing non-consequentialist moral principles (MP). Students’ elaborations to questions dealing with values towards genetic testing showed a correlation between the students’ religious affiliation and their reasoning, with religious students’ elaborations tending to be more principle based than those of secular ones. Overall, the students’ elaborations indicate that their main concern is the possibility that their personal genetic information will be exposed, and that their body’s personal rights will be violated. We conclude the paper by offering several practical recommendations based on our findings for genetic counseling that is specifically tailored to fit different patients according to their background.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Alvarado, K. A., Templer, D. I., Bresler, C., & Thomas-Dobson, S. (1995). The relationship of religious variables to death depression and death anxiety. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51, 202–204.CrossRefPubMed

Aqueel, A. I. (2007). Islamic ethical framework for research into and prevention of genetic diseases. Nature Genetics, 39, 1293–1298.CrossRef

Atkinson, B. E., & Malony, H. N. (1994). Religious maturity and psychological distress among older Christian women. Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 4, 165–179.CrossRef

Awwad, R., McCarthy, V. P., Bartels, D. M., & LeRoy, B. S. (2008). Culture and acculturation influences on Palestinian perceptions of prenatal genetic counseling. Genetic Counseling, 17, 101–116.CrossRef

Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (2000). Qualitative researching with text, image and sound. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Beekun, R. I., Stedham, Y., Westerman, J. W., & Yamamura, J. H. (2010). Effects of justice and utilitarianism on ethical decision making: a cross-cultural examination of gender similarities and differences. Business Ethics: A European Review, 19, 309–325.CrossRef

Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3), 352–377.CrossRef

Boerwinkel, D. J., Knippels, M. C., & Waarlo, A. J. (2011). Raising awareness of pre-symptomatic genetic testing. Journal of Biological Education, 45(4), 213–221.CrossRef

Bowling, B. V., Acra, E. E., Wang, L., Myers, M. F., Dean, G. E., Markle, G. C., et al. (2008). Development and evaluation of a genetics literacy assessment instrument for undergraduates. Genetics, 178, 15–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(3), 367.CrossRef

Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124–130.CrossRef

Curtis, M. B., Conover, T. L., & Chui, L. C. (2012). A cross-cultural study of the influence of country of origin, justice, power distance, and gender on ethical decision making. Journal of International Accounting Research, 11(1), 5–34.CrossRef

Dawson, V., & Venville, G. J. (2009). High-school students’ informal reasoning and argumentation about biotechnology: an indicator of scientific literacy? International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421–1445.CrossRef

Dickerson, D. L., Dawkins, K. R., & Penick, J. E. (2008). Clergy’s views of the relationship between science and religious faith and the implications for science education. Science & Education, 17, 359–386.CrossRef

Dietz, T., Fitzgeralds, A., & Shwom, R. (2005). Environmental values. Annual Review of Environmental Resources, 30, 335–372.CrossRef

Dormandy, E., Tsui, E. Y. L., & Marteau, T. M. (2007). Development of a measure of informed choice suitable for use in low literacy populations. Patient Education and Counselling, 66, 278–295.CrossRef

Elwyn, G., Frosch, D., Thomson, R., Joseph-Williams, N., Lloyd, A., Kinnersley, P., et al. (2012). Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27(10), 1361–1367.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Endicott, L., Bock, T., & Narvaez, D. (2003). Moral reasoning, intercultural development, and multicultural experiences: relations and cognitive underpinnings. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27(4), 403–419.CrossRef

Evers-Kiebooms, G., Welkenhuysen, M., Claes, E., Decruyenaere, M., & Denayer, L. (2000). The psychological complexity of predictive testing for late onset neurogenetic diseases and hereditary cancers: implications for multidisciplinary counselling and for genetic education. Social Science & Medicine, 51(6), 831–841.CrossRef

Gordis, R. (1978). Abortion: major wrong or basic right. Midstream, 24, 44–49.

Gordon, E. S., Griffin, G., Wawak, L., Pang, H., Gollust, S. E., & Bernhardt, B. A. (2012). “It’s not like judgment day”: public understanding of and reactions to personalized genomic risk information. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 21(3), 423–432.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Haga, S. B., Barry, W. T., Mills, R., Ginsburg, G. S., Svetkey, L., Sullivan, J., & Willard, H. F. (2013). Public knowledge of and attitudes toward genetics and genetic testing. Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers, 17(4), 327–335.

Herman, T., Be’ery, G., Heller, E., Cohen, C., Lebel, Y., Mozes, H., et al. (2014). The national-religious sector in Israel 2014. Israel: Israel Democracy Institute.

Hogan, K. (2002). Small groups’ ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 341–368.CrossRef

Inglehart, R. F., & Norris, P. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Jaffee, S., & Hyde, J. S. (2000). Gender differences in moral orientation: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126(5), 703.CrossRefPubMed

Kaufman, D. J., Bollinger, J. M., Dvoskin, R. L., & Scott, J. A. (2012). Risky business: risk perception and the use of medical services among customers of DTC personal genetic testing. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 21(3), 413–422.CrossRefPubMed

King, P. M., & Mayhew, M. J. (2002). Moral judgement development in higher education: insights from the defining issues test. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 247–270.CrossRef

Koenig, H., King, D., & Carson, V. B. (2012). Handbook of religion and health. Oxford University Press.

Kortenkamp, K. V., & Moore, C. F. (2001). Ecocentrism and anthropocentrism: moral reasoning about ecological commoms dilemmas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 261–272.CrossRef

Lee, O., Deaktor, R. A., Hart, J. E., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2005). An instructional intervention’s impact on the science and literacy achievement of culturally and linguistically diverse elementary students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(8), 857–887.CrossRef

Lewis, L. J. (2002). Models of genetic counseling and their effects on multicultural genetic counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 11(3), 193–212.CrossRefPubMed

Lindahl, M. G. (2009). Ethics or morals: understanding students’ values related to genetic tests on humans. Science & Education, 18(10), 1285–1311.CrossRef

Loo, R., & Thorpe, K. (1998). Attitudes toward women’s roles in society: a replication after 20 years. Sex Roles, 39(11–12), 903–912.CrossRef

Makoul, G., & Clayman, M. L. (2006). An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters. Patient Education and Counseling, 60(3), 301–312.CrossRefPubMed

Marteau, T. M., Dormandy, E., & Michie, S. (2001). A measure of informed choice. Health Expectations, 4, 99–108.CrossRefPubMed

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. (2015). http://www.ninds.nih.gov. Retrieved 25/2/2015.

National Society of Genetic Counselors. (2013). http://www.nsgc.org. Retrieved 20/11/2013.

Ngim, C. F., Lai, N. M., Ibrahim, H., & Ratnasingam, V. (2013). Attitudes towards prenatal diagnosis and abortion in a multi-ethnic country: a survey among parents of children with thalassaemia major in Malaysia. Journal of Community Genetics, 4(2), 215–221.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Nucci, L. P. (2001). Education in the moral domain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Oreg, S., & Katz-Gerro, T. (2006). Predicting proenvironmental behavior crass-nationally: values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment and Behavior, 38, 462–483.CrossRef

Ota Wang, V. (2001). Multicultural genetic counseling: then, now, and in the 21st century. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 106, 208–215.CrossRef

Parette, P. (1999). Transition planning with families across cultures. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 22, 213–211.CrossRef

Parsons, E. C., & Carlone, H. B. (2013). Culture and science education in the 21st century: extending and making the cultural box more inclusive. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(1), 1–11.CrossRef

Peters, K. F., & Petrill, S. A. (2011). Development of a scale to assess the background, needs, and expectations of genetic counseling clients. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 155(4), 673–683.CrossRef

Pivetti, M., & Melotti, G. (2013). Prenatal genetic testing: an investigation of determining factors affecting the decision-making process. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 22(1), 76–89.CrossRefPubMed

Pivetti, M., Montali, L., & Simonetti, G. (2012). The discourse around usefulness, morality, risk and trust: a focus group study on prenatal genetic testing. Prenatal Diagnosis, 32(12), 1205–1211.CrossRefPubMed

Powell, M., & Ansic, D. (1997). Gender differences in risk behaviour in financial decision-making: an experimental analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18(6), 605–628.CrossRef

Raz, A. E. (2004). Important to test, important to support”: attitudes toward disability rights and prenatal diagnosis among leaders of support groups for genetic disorders in Israel. Social Science & Medicine, 59(9), 1857–1866.CrossRef

Raz, A. E. (2009). Community genetics and genetic alliances: Eugenics, carrier testing, and networks of risk. New York: Routledge.

Raz, A. E., & Atar, M. (2003). Nondirectiveness and its lay interpretations: the effect of counseling style, ethnicity and culture on attitudes towards genetic counseling among Jewish and Bedouin respondents in Israel. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 12(4), 313–332.CrossRefPubMed

Richardson, H. S. (2014). In E. N. Zalta (ed.), “Moral reasoning”, The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter Edition), URL= http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/reasoning-moral/.

Rosner, G., Rosner, S., & Orr-Urtreger, A. (2009). Genetic testing in Israel: an overview. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 10, 175–192.CrossRefPubMed

Rothbart, M. K., Hanley, D., & Albert, M. (1986). Gender differences in moral reasoning. Sex Roles, 15(11–12), 645–653.CrossRef

Saaty, T. L. (2000). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process (Vol. 6). Pittsburgh: Rws Publications.

Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: the effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463–1488.CrossRef

Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88(1), 4–27.CrossRef

Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112–138.CrossRef

Schiff, D. (2002). Abortion in Judaism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25(1), 1–65.CrossRef

Seth, S. G., Goka, T., Harbison, A., Hollier, L., Peterson, S., Ramondetta, L., et al. (2011). Exploring the role of religiosity and spirituality in amniocentesis decision-making among Latinas. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 20(6), 660–673.CrossRefPubMed

Shaw, A. (2011). Risk and reproductive decisions: British Pakistani couples’ responses to genetic counselling. Social Science & Medicine, 73(1), 111–120.CrossRef

Shaw, A., & Hurst, J. A. (2008). “What is this genetics, anyway?” Understandings of genetics, illness causality and inheritance among British Pakistani users of genetic services. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 17, 373–383.CrossRefPubMed

Sher, C., Romano-Zelekha, O., Green, M. S., & Shohat, T. (2003). Factors affecting performance of prenatal genetic testing by Israeli Jewish women. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 120(3), 418–422.CrossRef

Shiloh, S. (1994). Heuristics and biases in health decision making: their expression in genetic counseling. In L. Heath, & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Applications of heuristics and biases to social issues (pp. 13–30). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRef

Siani, M., & Assaraf, O. B. (2015). University students’ attitudes towards genetic testing: a comparative study. American Journal of Public Health Research, 3(3), 81–90.CrossRef

Signorielli, N. (2012). Gender-role socialization in the twenty-first century. In A. N. Valdivia (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of media studies: Media history and the foundations of media studies. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. Retrieved from doi:10.1002/9781444361506.wbiems116.

Solli, A., Bach, F., & Åkerman, B. (2014). Learning to argue as a biotechnologist: disprivileging opposition to genetically modified food. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9(1), 1–23.CrossRef

Starr, L. J. (2010). Does anyone really know anything? An exploration of constructivist meaning and identity in the tension between scientific and religious knowledge. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5, 191–200.CrossRef

Stephens, M., Jordens, C. F., Kerridge, I. H., & Ankeny, R. A. (2010). Religious perspectives on abortion and a secular response. Journal of Religion and Health, 49(4), 513–535.CrossRefPubMed

Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmantally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424.CrossRef

Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: the case of environmental concern. Human Ecology Review, 6(2), 81–97.

Taylor, S. (2011). A population-based survey in Australia of men’s and women’s perceptions of genetic risk and predictive genetic testing and implications for primary care. Public Health Genomics, 14(6), 325–336.CrossRefPubMed

Ten Have, H. (2001). Genetics and culture: the geneticization thesis medicine. Health Care and Philosophy, 4, 295–304.CrossRef

Tibben, A. (1993). What is knowledge but grieving? On psychological effects of presymptomatic DNA-testing for Huntington’s disease. Thesis, Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Tytler, R. (2012). Socio-scientific issues, sustainability and science education. Research in Science Education, 42(1), 155–163.CrossRef

Van der Zande, P., Akkerman, S. F., Brekelmans, M., Waarlo, A. J., & Vermunt, J. D. (2012). Expertise for teaching biology situated in the context of genetic testing. International Journal of Science Education, 34(11), 1741–1767.CrossRef

Vedder-Weiss, D., & Fortus, D. (2012). Adolescents’ declining motivation to learn science: a follow-up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1057–1095.CrossRef

Wagner, S. C., & Sanders, G. L. (2001). Considerations in ethical decision-making and software piracy. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(1–2), 161–167.CrossRef

Weil, J. (2001). Multicultural education and genetic counseling. Clinical Genetics, 59(3), 143–149.CrossRefPubMed

Wert, G. D., Meulen, R. T., Mordacci, R., & Tallacchini, M. (2003). Ethics and genetics: A workbook for practitioners and students. Berghahn Books.

Williams, D. R., Larson, D. B., Buckler, R. E., Heckmann, R. C., & Pyle, C. M. (1991). Religion and psychological distress in a community sample. Social Science & Medicine, 32(11), 1257–1262.CrossRef

Wilsdon, J., & Willis, R. (2004). See-through science: Why public engagement needs to move upstream. London: Demos.

Woltanski, A. R., Cragun, R. T., Myers, M. F., & Cragun, D. L. (2009). Views on abortion: a comparison of female genetic counselors and women from the general population. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 18(1), 28–41.CrossRefPubMed

Zayts, O., Sarangi, S., Thong, M. K., Chung, B. H. Y., Lo, I. F. M., Kan, A. S. Y., ... & Wasant, P. (2013). Genetic counseling/consultation in South-East Asia: a report from the workshop at the 10th Asia Pacific conference on human genetics. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 22(6), 917–924.

Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., Ruzek, M., Linder, A., & Lin, S. S. (2013). Cross-cultural epistemological orientations to socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 251–283.CrossRef

Zlotogora, J. (2002). Parental decisions to abort or continue a pregnancy with an abnormal finding after an invasive prenatal test. Prenatal Diagnosis, 22(12), 1102–1106.CrossRefPubMed

Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62.CrossRef

Titel: The Moral Reasoning of Genetic Dilemmas Amongst Jewish Israeli Undergraduate Students with Different Religious Affiliations and Scientific Backgrounds
verfasst von: Merav Siani
Orit Ben-Zvi Assaraf
Publikationsdatum: 07.12.2015
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Genetic Counseling / Ausgabe 3/2016
Print ISSN: 1059-7700
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-3599
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-015-9918-5

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

The Moral Reasoning of Genetic Dilemmas Amongst Jewish Israeli Undergraduate Students with Different Religious Affiliations and Scientific Backgrounds

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Hirsutismus bei PCOS: Laser- und Lichttherapien helfen

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Weniger postpartale Depressionen nach Esketamin-Einmalgabe

Bei RSV-Impfung vor 60. Lebensjahr über Off-Label-Gebrauch aufklären!

Update Gynäkologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2016

Prognostic Factors for Distress After Genetic Testing for Hereditary Cancer

The Quality of Genetic Counseling and Connected Factors as Evaluated by Male BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers in Finland

Impact of Genetic Counseling and Testing on Altruistic Motivations to Test for BRCA1/2: a Longitudinal Study

Assessment of the Readability of Genetic Counseling Patient Letters

Sex Education and Intellectual Disability: Practices and Insight from Pediatric Genetic Counselors

Reproductive Decision-Making in MMR Mutation Carriers After Results Disclosure: Impact of Psychological Status in Childbearing Options

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Hirsutismus bei PCOS: Laser- und Lichttherapien helfen

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Weniger postpartale Depressionen nach Esketamin-Einmalgabe

Bei RSV-Impfung vor 60. Lebensjahr über Off-Label-Gebrauch aufklären!

Update Gynäkologie