1. Advocates and Critics HSCI E137 Feb. 16, 2010 First essay due next week Feb. 23 After-class section in G135 Panel discussion on HGP Feb 22 (see announcement on course website)

2. Questions about the advocates and critics: Where/how do the ethical frameworks come into play? What are their grounds/justifications for support or critique? What are your own reactions to them?

3. The landscape of the biotech debates Advocates: Caplan, Pinker Critics: Sandel, Hubbard/Newman, Kass The historical trend: toward individual choice and patient empowerment But are these the only or utmost values?

4. On genetic testing: “Genetic information should not be used to disadvantage people. And genetic information should be the subject of choice.” (p. 121) Arthur Caplan, U. Penn bioethicist

5. On genetic testing: “Genetic information should not be used to disadvantage people. And genetic information should be the subject of choice.” (p. 121) On the Suleman case: “I find it a huge ethical failure that she was even accepted as a patient.” NY Times, 2/4/09 Arthur Caplan, U. Penn bioethicist

6. Steven Pinker Professor of psychology At Harvard 23andMe23andMe: https://www.23andme.com/https://www.23andme.com/ The ultimate consumer empowerment? What does informed consent mean now? Core values; consent document (and previous version)

7. Michael Sandel, Professor of Government at Harvard; “The Case Against Perfection,” 2004

8. Leon Kass, Professor in Committee on Social Thought, University of Chicago; Chairman of former President Bush’s Council on Bioethics (2001-2005)

9. Ruth Hubbard, Professor emerita of biology At Harvard Stuart Newman, cell and developmental biologist at New York Medical College

10. Questions about the advocates and critics: Where/how do the ethical frameworks come into play? What are their grounds/justifications for support or critique? What are your own reactions to them? And which seemed most like “The Birthmark”?