Why Dialogue?

Genetic research, knowledge and technology may bring considerable benefits to the health of future society, but it is a double-edged sword. It could potentially harm individuals and groups of people. Value-laden issues such as right to privacy versus moral responsibility, discrimination based on genetic information, and access to genetic and reproductive technology need to be considered so that society guides the use of genetic information and technology in ways to maximize benefits and avoid harms.

Legislators and other leaders in policy-making claim to act on their constituents’ behalf, but policy is often most strongly influenced by expert advice, special interest groups or powerful individuals, not the general public. Special interest groups and powerful individuals often have their own agenda and are not usually motivated by the concerns of the general public. Experts certainly should play an important role in the development of policy, but no group of experts can presume to know "the truth" in value-laden areas of policy-making. Experts are not in fact experts when it comes to societal values. Society itself is the expert on its values.

As members of a democratic society, we have the right and responsibility to make sure that our voices--our values and informed opinions--are heard by legislators and other policy makers. That voice is especially important when it comes from communities who have values and concerns different from larger or more powerful groups of society.

Oftentimes, surveys or polls are conducted to get a feel for public opinion, but when opinion involves grappling with complex moral and ethical considerations, a survey just is not enough. Surveys often reflect knee-jerk reactions to questions because they do not provide sufficient opportunity for people to reflect upon their own values nor do they allow an interchange of values, attitudes and beliefs.

While surveys have a limited useful role, the dialogue process is a more effective, thorough manner by which the public can have its collective voice be heard by policy-makers for a number of reasons. First, people need to be educated on the issues to fully consider all angles before they can voice an informed opinion, and education is an integral component of the dialogue process. Second, people need to come together face-to-face to share and understand those of similar and conflicting beliefs in order to gain new perspectives on the potential benefits and dangers of genetic research and technology. Through thoughtful discussion of the issues, people are able to clarify and verbalize their own values, attitudes and beliefs and then attempt to arrive at a group consensus which will translate into effective policy recommendations.

Dialogue is a slow process, but the time spent is well invested because it produces thoughtful policy recommendations through an interactive process which educates people and, most importantly, allows them to examine their own values, attitudes and beliefs and those of others. Such recommendations are more useful to policy-makers as a representation of collective community voices.

 

 

 

Contacting the Project | Home
 Last updated 08/07/00
Copyright © 2001 Communities of Color & Genetics Policy Project