Military genomic testing: Proportionality, expected benefits, and the connection between genotypes and phenotypes

1Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Mehlman and Li offer a framework for approaching the bioethical issues raised by themilitary use of genomics that is compellingly grounded in both the contemporary civilian and military ethics of medical research, arguing that military commanders must be bound by the two principles of paternalism and proportionality. I agree fully. But I argue here that this is a much higher bar than we may fully realize. Just as the principle of proportionality relies upon a thorough assessment of harms caused and military advantage gained, the use of genomic research, on Mehlman and Li's view, will require an accurate understanding of the connection between genotypes and phenotypes - accurate enough to ameliorate the risk undertaken by our armed forces in being subject to such research. Recent conceptual work in evolutionary theory and the philosophy of biology, however, renders it doubtful that such knowledge is forthcoming.The complexity of the relationship between genotypic factors and realized traits (the so-called 'G→P map') makes the estimation of potential military advantage, as well as potential harm to our troops, incredibly challenging. Such fundamental conceptual challenges call into question our ability to ever satisfactorily satisfy the demands of a sufficiently rigorous ethical standard.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pence, C. H. (2016). Military genomic testing: Proportionality, expected benefits, and the connection between genotypes and phenotypes. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 2(3), 85–91. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsu035

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free