Self-Knowledge and Risk in Stratified Medicine

3Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This article considers why and how self-knowledge is important to communication about risk and behaviour change by arguing for four claims. First, it is doubtful that genetic knowledge should properly be called ‘self-knowledge’ when its ordinary effects on self-motivation and behaviour change seem so slight. Second, temptations towards a reductionist, fatalist, construal of persons’ futures through a ‘molecular optic’ should be resisted. Third, any plausible effort to change people's behaviour must engage with cultural self-knowledge, values and beliefs, catalysed by the communication of genetic risk. For example, while a Judaeo-Christian notion of self-knowledge is distinctively theological, people's self-knowledge is plural in its insight and sources. Fourth, self-knowledge is found in compassionate, if tense, communion which yields freedom from determinism even amidst suffering. Stratified medicine thus offers a newly precise kind of humanising health care through societal solidarity with the riskiest. However, stratification may also mean that molecularly unstratified, ‘B’ patients’ experience involves accentuated suffering and disappointment, a concern requiring further research.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hordern, J. (2017). Self-Knowledge and Risk in Stratified Medicine. New Bioethics, 23(1), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2017.1314889

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