Comparative Empirical Bioethics: Dilemmas of Genetic Testing and Euthanasia in Israel and Germany

This book is a comprehensive, empirically-grounded exploration of the relationship between bioethics, culture, and the perspective of being affected. It provides a new outlook on how complex “bioethical” issues become questions of everyday life.  The authors focus on two contexts, genetic testing and end-of-life care, to locate and demonstrate emerging themes of responsibility, such as self-responsibility, responsibility for kin, and the responsibility of society. Within these themes, the duty to know versus the right not to know one's genetic fate (in the context of genetic testing), or the sanctity of life versus self-determination (in the context of end of life care) are identified as culturally embedded dilemmas that are very much relevant for lay persons. Furthermore, cultural factors such as religion, history, utopian and dystopian views of biomedical technologies, outlooks on the body and on health/illness, and citizenship are examined. Health issues are increasingly becoming a question of assessing risk and responsibility: How can we better prepare ourselves for the future? We all make such assessments in a way that combines personal inclinations, professional recommendations, and cultural framings. There is still much to be learned about the interplay between these three dimensions. 

   

“This is a landmark study. Raz and Schicktanz have investigated ethical reasonings by expert and lay people in Israel and Germany about genetic testing and decisions at the end-of-life. In important respects, the widely shared attitudes in Germany and Israel in regard to bioethical issues appear at opposing ends of a moral spectrum. That’s why these countries are interesting to be studied comparatively. By juxtaposing different levels of comparison the authors explore how decisions are made in the context of life plans, not as individual choices, as frequently (and tacitly) assumed in bioethics. It is life-plans which make decisions meaningful. In this conceptual framework we can understand how bioethical decisions refer to cultural grammars. This study is extremely valuable because it also suggests and examines a practical methodology for doing comparative bioethics, which can be applied in other settings. It is also important since it brings reflexivity into bioethical thinking.” (Christoph Rehmann-Sutter, Professor of Theory and Ethics in the Biosciences, University of Lübeck) 

“Contemporary biomedicine increases our possible control over our lives, at its different stages from womb to tomb, turning us all into lay bioethicists having to decide about how we handle genetic risk, or prepare for the end of life.  Written together by a prominent bioethicist and a leading medical sociologist, whose theoretical perspectives complement one another, this extremely interesting book offers a special, empirically grounded POV on how personal, cultural and professional perspectives intertwine in every- day life in Israel and Germany.  The different book chapters beautifully portray how abstract cultural ideas about knowledge, kin-responsibility, citizenship, or the sanctity of life, operate in different localities and personal lives.  The book is highly recommended for all scholars of medical sociology and bioethics, and especially for anyone interested in a thorough comparative analysis in the growing field of empirical bioethics, or in specific issues such as genetic testing and end of life decisions.” (Yael Hashiloni-Dolev, Associate Professor, School of Government and Society, The Academic College of Tel-Aviv-Yaffo, Israel)

“Raz and Schicktanz make a greatcontribution to the emerging literature on how the public’s ethical views can be incorporated into bioethical policy. Through empirical examination of the public’s views of the ethics of genetic testing and euthanasia in Germany and Israel, we can see the distance between the views of the public and the experts, and the influence of national context.  This book will not only be of great use to those interested in synthesizing expert and lay opinion in ethics, but to debates about biomedical issues in these two countries.” (John H. Evans, Professor of Sociology, Associate Dean of Social Sciences, University of California, San Diego)