The microphysics of accountability

Area of Science:

• Bioethics
• Sociology of Law
• Science and Technology Studies

Background:

• The law's role in legitimizing scientific advancements, particularly in genetic medicine, is complex.
• Medical professionals often navigate ethical considerations by referencing legal frameworks.
• Existing literature explores the law's function in accountability but often overlooks its rhetorical deployment in practice.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate how medical experts utilize the law to establish accountability for genetic medicine practices.
• To analyze the argumentative function of law in legitimizing professional actions within genetic medicine.
• To understand how legal references are rhetorically employed to manage ethical and social implications.

Main Methods:

• Qualitative analysis of interview data from medical experts.
• Theoretical framework informed by Sheila Jasanoff's work on law and accountability.
• Application of Michel Foucault's perspectives on the non-repressive functions of law.

Main Results:

• Medical experts strategically use the law to present their professional actions as ethically sound.
• Legal references serve to make medical practices appear socially robust and beyond reproach.
• The law is rhetorically employed to shut down discussions on ethical and social issues, transferring responsibility.

Conclusions:

• Referring to the law enables genetic medicine experts to avoid in-depth engagement with ethical and social concerns.
• The law acts as a tool for communicative closure, signaling that further debate is unnecessary.
• Legal discourse allows experts to promote professional interests and deflect ethical problems onto other actors.