ABSTRACT
The final three chapters of this book address in more detail some of the issues and concepts which have been shown in the previous chapters to underpin much public discourse on human genetics. This chapter examines the concept of geneticisation, showing how people construct, and engage with, geneticised accounts of (especially) health and identity in different contexts. A key frame in much genetics discourse is the assumption, implicit or explicit, that there is something ‘exceptional’ or special about genetic/ genomic knowledge, and that it takes precedence over other explanations or knowledge bases. This is geneticisation, which at its most extreme can be classified as genetic hype. To understand these debates, it is important to be clear about the ways in which genetics is or is not really exceptional; this chapter aims to ensure a good definition of genetic exceptionalism and hence to disentangle some of the debates. This chapter thus first critically examines genetics’ exceptional status as it is framed by specific actors in specific circumstances, and second explores how a number of these and other publics are engaging with the construction, and the implications, of ‘exceptional genetics’, particularly in relation to health, identity, social justice and equity, and also civil liberties and crime (chapter 3). There are important policy implications, particularly as an application of genetic exceptionalism is the formation of an ethical imperative to undertake genetic research, also framed in terms of the future (chapter 8). Section One explores the idea that there is something ‘exceptional’ about genetics and shows how this frequently manifests itself in three often related, and sometimes muddled ideas, which are useful to separate: genetic determinism, genetic essentialism and genetic reductionism. This is followed by an overview of genetic exceptionalism and a discussion of where it may and may not have validity as an explanation.
