IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v37y2010i8p597-609.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Embryos, ethics and expertise: the emerging model of the research ethics regulator

Author

Listed:
  • Megan Allyse

Abstract

Embryonic stem cell research poses challenges for traditionally secular governing structures. An increasingly popular response has been to create research ethics regulators, bureaucratic agencies assigned to generate or enforce normative regulations surrounding the use of embryos in research. This paper examines three examples: Japan's Bioethics and Biosafety Office, the UK's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority and the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine. It explores the structure and mandate of each agency, its definition and employment of ethico-technical expertise and the extent to which the relocation of normative decision-making from the political sphere and into the voluntary sphere has democratized decision-making about the use of emerging technologies. We conclude that the model of the research ethics regulator appears successful at ameliorating public conflict and channeling dissent but there is little evidence to suggest that a reliance on ethico-technical, lay expertise has resulted in the relief of traditional critiques of regulatory culture. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Megan Allyse, 2010. "Embryos, ethics and expertise: the emerging model of the research ethics regulator," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(8), pages 597-609, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:37:y:2010:i:8:p:597-609
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234210X12767691861092
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:37:y:2010:i:8:p:597-609. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.