This article deals with societal challenges of Public Health Genetics and reflects on social justice as its fundamental norm. Accordingly, the first emphasis is put on the difference between the idea of the good and the right. Then the capabilities approach is introduced as the adequate concept of justice in Public Health Genetics. Considering the conflict between respect for autonomy and common welfare in this field of discussion, the author finally presents an ethical grading.

Keywords:
Autonomy, Capabilities approach, Common welfare, Ethical aspects, Social justice
1.
Rawls J: A Theory of Justice, revised. Cambridge, Harvard University, 1999.
2.
Khoury MJ, Burke W, Thomson EJ (eds): Genetics and Public Health in the 21st Century. Using Genetic Information to Improve Health and Prevent Disease. New York, Oxford University Press, 2000.
3.
Holtzmann NA, Marteu TM: Will genetics revolutionize medicine? N Engl J Med 2000;343:141–144.
4.
Zimmern R, Emry J, Richards T: Putting genetics in perspective (editorial). BMJ 2001;322:1005–1006.
5.
Wilson JMG, Jungner G: Principles and practice of screening for disease. Public Health Papers 34. Geneva, WHO, 1968.
6.
Brand A: Prädiktive Gentests – Paradigmenwechsel für Prävention und Gesundheitsversorgung? Gesundheitswesen 2002;64:224–229.
7.
Buchanan A, Brock DW, Daniels N, Wikler D: From Chance to Choice. Genetics and Justice. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
8.
Paul NW: Auswirkungen der Molekularen Medizin auf Gesundheit und Gesellschaft. Gutachten Bio- und Gentechnologie für die Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Berlin, Friedrich- Ebert-Stiftung, 2004.
9.
Schröder P: Gendiagnostische Gerechtigkeit. Eine ethische Studie über die Herausforderungen postnataler genetischer Prädiktion. Münster, LIT, 2003.
10.
Dabrock P: Genetik und soziale Gerechtigkeit. Systematische İberlegungen im Gespräch mit ‘From Chance to Choice’; in Dabrock P, Jähnichen T, Klinnert L, Maaser W (eds): Kriterien der Gerechtigkeit. Gütersloh, Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2003, pp 192–214.
11.
Dabrock P: Capability-Approach und Decent Minimum. Befähigungsgerechtigkeit als Kriterium möglicher Priorisierung im Gesundheitswesen. Z Evang Ethik 2001;46:202–215.
12.
Dabrock P: Menschenbilder und Verteilungsgerechtigkeit im Gesundheitswesen. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2003;128:210–213.
13.
Sen A: Development as Freedom. New York, Knopf, 1999.
14.
Nussbaum M: Women and Human Development. The Capabilities Approach. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
15.
Pauer-Studer H: Autonom Leben. Reflexionen über Freiheit und Gleichheit (stw 1496). Frankfurt, Suhrkamp, 2000.
16.
Fraser N: Soziale Gerechtigkeit im Zeitalter der Identitätspolitik. Umverteilung, Anerkennung und Beteiligung; in Fraser N, Honneth A: Umverteilung oder Anerkennung? Eine politisch-philosophische Kontroverse. Frankfurt, Suhrkamp, 2003, pp 13–128.
17.
French ME, Moore JB: Harnessing Genetics to Prevent Disease and Promote Health. Washington, Partnership for Prevention, 2003.
18.
Wilkinson RG: Kranke Gesellschaften. Soziales Gleichgewicht und Gesundheit. Wien, Springer, 2001.
19.
Brand A, Dabrock P, Gibis B: Neugeborenen Screening auf angeborene Stoffwechselstörungen und Endokrinopathien – aktuelle ethische Fragen aus unterschiedlichen Perspektiven; in Dörries A, Simon A, Wiesemann C, Wolfslast G (eds): Das Kind als Patient. Ethische Konflikte zwischen Kindeswohl und Kindeswille. Abstract-Band der Jahrestagung der Akademie für Ethik in der Medizin e.V. Frankfurt, Campus, 2002, pp 217–233.
© 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel
2006
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.