Positioning and life politics through reproductive technology debates in

biology class

Science & the Public Conference, Imperial College London, 19th May 2007

Padraig Murphy,Biosciences and Society (BSS) Research Group,

School of Communications/National Institute for Cellular Biotechnology,

Dublin City University,Dublin 9.

+353-1-7007703Padraig.Murphy@dcu.ie

Outline

• What is ‘life politics’?

• a thesis that suggests new reproductive and genetic technologies (NRGTs) are part of an emerging life politics (Giddens, 1991)

• ‘Positioning’

•how young people bring into discourse ideas about scientific progress, nature and the body using framing strategies and local performed action

•how pedagogic practices may respond to, and take part in, such discursive strategies using film and student/bioscientist interaction

Let’s go to the ‘micro’ level: 2 activities for biology classrooms….

1. A film - The Gift 2. A presenter – the biotechnologist

6 schools, senior level classroom, 15-17 years, 4 co-ed, 2 single sex, ‘religious ethos’

The Gift characters...

http://www.geneticfutures.co.uk

Positioning of students in a ‘performed’ debate: representing characters’ points of view

Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree

Eight statements are called out to the classroom

Students ‘position’ themselves physically and in discourse about NRGTs

Statements representing characters’ points of view

(1) JENNIFER is right to argue that even though she knows that there is a risk of her child inheriting Friedreich’s ataxia, she wants ‘nature’ to take its course.

(2) ANNIE is right, RYAN has a right to be tested because he has a right to know what’s going to happen to him.

(3) JENNIFER’S doctor is right to argue that Jennifer must do something now that she knows the risk.

(YTouring/Wellcome Trust)

(4) RYAN’S doctor is right to argue that Ryan shouldn’t be tested if there is no treatment available.

(5) In selecting MARK, RYAN and JENNIFER were only doing what was best for him.

(6) RYAN and JENNIFER were right to select MARK to be free of Friedriech’s ataxia.

(7) RYAN was right to select the sex of his child. (8) RYAN was right to select MARK to have the

best qualities.

(YTouring/Wellcome Trust)

The ‘sequestration of experience’ (Giddens, Modernity and Self-Identity 1991)

-how the creation of institutions in modernity (eg science, state, industry) has resulted in a removal of uncomfortable or taboo content that deals with finitude and origins of the body.

-education is one such institution (also see McGinnis and Simmons, 1999), focusing on technical skills and practices of modernity, rather than the moral questions that are part of traditional day-to-day societies, which are suppressed.

-life politics then is the emerging struggle for identity by individuals and institutions of modernity to bring back into focus those moral and existential concepts once normal to Western traditional discussions.

Life politics (Giddens, Modernity and Self-Identity, 1991)

“concerns political issues which flow from processes of self-actualisation in post-traditional contexts, where globalising influences intrude deeply into the reflexive project of the self, and conversely where processes of self-realisation influence global strategies (p214).”

“remoralising of daily life”

“everything that used to be natural….now has to be chosen, or decided about” (Giddens, 1994, p90-91)

Life politics defined (Giddens, Modernity and Self-Identity 1991)

“ does not primarily concern the conditions which liberate us in order to make choices: it is a politics of choice. While emancipatory politics is a politics of life chances, life politics is a politics of lifestyle (original emphasis) (p214).” (Middle Way)

Origins: emancipatory politic

1960s onwards – struggle to provide greater choices and end oppression and based on race, class, sexuality, anti-liberalism (Left v Right)

The rise of the repressed in the history of knowledge: strategies of the dominant, ruses of the resistant (Michel de Certeau)

Life politics and choice: a ‘structurational’ view

Lifestyle, choices. Crucially – not just concerns of the middle-classes (this is contested)

Everyday choice – the personal becomes political

Local effects the global, global affects the local

Statements to the world

Body art on youtube

Life Politics (capital ‘P’)

Human Genome Project

Pro-life

Anti-Euthanaesia

Pro-Intelligent Design

V

Life Politics (capital ‘P’)

‘Frames are principles of selection, emphasis and presentation composed of little tacit theories about what exists, what happens, and what matters (Gitlin, 1980).’

‘To frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating context, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described (Entman, 1993).’

Framing – how people represent a position in argument

progress v harmony with nature

fate v risk

the sacred

liberal individualism v social responsibility

‘Framing’ new reproductive and genetic technologies

Themes and counterthemes that resonate with the public through the media(Gamson, 1992)

Cultural themes -‘safe, conventional, and normative’ (ibid. p135) taken-for-granted linkages to the wider cultural world

eg scientific progress

Counterthemes - ‘adversarial, contentious, oppositional (p135).’

eg harmony with nature

Always resistance to the dominant discourse by the politically excluded eg class, gender, disabled

Symbolic resonance of debate in new situation

- a new political pedagogy

Polarisation not tolerated? (McDonnell, 1999)

B FRAMES [solid] Scientific rationalism, embryo

not a person, not concerned with its rights

C FRAMES [semi-fluid] Life experience of disability, genetic disease or decision-

making

‘FLOATING’ POSITIONS [fluid] ‘Sequestered experience’ but committed to life decisions

‘Pro-life’ media position ‘Pro-choice' media position

A FRAMES [solid] Embryo as person, therefore human,

therefore has rights

Individuals and collectives in society-increased individualisation (Beck, 1992)

- increased globalisation, mediation (Giddens, 1991) - increased reflexivity, abstract systems (Giddens, 1991)

- increased choice

How shall we live?

Biotechnology in a ‘new situation’ of late modernity: struggles with humanity and nature at the local and global level

Life politics and increased choice of resources:

Young participants:

•draw on media imagery of cloning and other NRGTs

•use symbolically constructed communication strategies (or ruses) that are culturally embedded:‘progress,’ ‘harmony with nature’, ‘fate,’ ‘risk,’ ‘the sacred,’ ‘liberal individualism,’ ‘social responsibility’ (structural/macro)

PositioningYoung participants:•perform gendered power plays in deciding their ‘beliefs’ (local/micro)

Summary: structurational life politics

Presentation of self, interaction

GOFFMAN

Cultural frames based on media issues

GAMSON

GIDDENS

Self-identity and lifestyle politics

Developing a contemporary (structurational)social theory of technology, identity and pedagogy: ‘the 3 Gs’