Naomi Pfeffer

Theories of race, ethnicity and culture

Series editor: Priscilla Alderson This is the fourth in a series of six articles on the importance of theories and values in health research Advice on which of the many possible definitions of race, ethnicity, and culture is most appropriate has been published in some medical journals.1Sensitivity to what these words may mean to an individual and, in a collective context, their explosive potential, has been encouraged partly by the latest phase in what has been called the “race policy environment.” Its history can be summarised briefly. The “race neutrality” of British public policy that emerged in the postwar period, which contributed to the entrenchment of inequality, was supplanted in the mid-1960s by assimiliationist policies informed by a belief that disadvantage in “racial” minorities might be eradicated if they adopted indigenous cultural behaviours such as the English diet. These policies were replaced in the 1980s by others promoting “racial harmony,” a blending of identities as a means of defusing racial tension. In the current phase, there is a recognition of the importance that people attach to having their distinctive identity acknowledged and respected, and moreover, recognition that the structure of British society and institutional racism both contribute to the disadvantages experienced by minorities.2 ### Summary points Race, ethnicity, and culture should not be perceived as problematic “facts” or “things” The category “white” is too broad —and often meaningless Research into the relevance of race, ethnicity, and culture should address everyones health, not just that of the victims of inequality Globalisation, displacement, and social movements are undermining the capacity of one nation to fix peoples identity The current phase of this race policy environment is stimulating research into whether, how, and when racism and race, ethnicity, or culture influence susceptibility to disease and access to or use of health services. Investigators, …

Framing Women, Framing Fetuses: How Britain Regulates Arrangements for the Collection and Use of Aborted Fetuses in Stem Cell Research and Therapies

This article engages with the frequently made claim that the UK has a transparent, accountable and strict but permissive regulatory approach to research using pre-implantation human embryos created in vitro and that this approach provides reassurance to the public in a particularly emotive area, has the full confidence of the scientific and medical research communities, and gives the UK a competitive advantage in the international field of stem cell research. Aborted fetuses are another controversial source of stem cells although their use is less widely known. The paper uses Jasanoffs conceptual tool of framing to analyse the history of the legislative and governance arrangements for the collection of aborted fetuses for use in stem cell research and therapies in Britain. We argue that the arrangements are confused, lack transparency, are out of line with current good practice on seeking consent, and that non-compliance with regulations is condoned. Furthermore, in our view, the separation of legal and governance arrangements for collection and use of pre-implantation human embryos and aborted fetuses will increasingly become problematic, and we conclude by proposing that there is increasingly a potential for conflict between them.

Consent to the use of aborted fetuses in stem cell research and therapies

This paper identifies the legal and policy framework relating to the use of aborted fetuses in stem cell research and therapies and contrasts this with the collection of embryos for research. It suggests that more attention should be given to questions about the kind of consent sought by researchers from women and that there should be more transparency about how aborted fetuses are used. It reports on variability in current practices of research ethics committees and researchers and uncertainty about the guidance available to them. It argues that there is a need for wide public discussion about the policy issues relating to fetal tissue use in stem cell research and the need for clarification of the law in this area.

Regulating the collection and use of fetal stem cells

They currently lie in a regulatory limbo

The Davies Report: The “Great Battle” in Swansea

Michael Davies Thoemmes, pounds sterling3.99, pp 139 ISBN 1 85506 366 2 Over the past few years, a number of stories have given rise to concerns about declining standards of propriety and accountability in public life. People working in what remains of the public sector have not been immune from criticism. The “new” NHS has been a source of scandal. There is a widespread belief that the internal market introduced values which undermine the public service ethos of those working within it. Paradoxically, although similar values have been introduced into universities, there have been relatively few allegations of …