ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the theoretical assumptions underpinning mainstream or cognitive psychology as an approach to informing the childhood testing debate. Arguments have been made for basing clinical practice on objective empiricism rather than medical opinion and prejudice. The generation of empirical findings has been called for by those arguing for more objective means of approaching the issues involved in debating the practice of genetic testing in childhood. Research within health psychology, adopting a positivistic methodology, has generated a ‘proliferation of statistically significant but inconsistent findings’. Differences can be approached by attempting to establish the factors responsible for variation. Competence is assessed within an interaction in which the relevant issues and understandings are constructed. It is possible to argue that, rather than being a description of a mental state, understanding is demonstrated through social practices. Rational theories of the human subject and the notion of objectivity have been employed in arguments that policy should be based on empirical psychological research.
