Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In the UK, there appears to be a general consensus that the public understanding of genetics is poor: crudely put, there is not enough of it. There is also a commonly expressed view that ethical and social debate is desperately lagging behind scientific and technological innovation in this field. A solution commonly put forward is for 'the public' to be better educated: at the least to be provided with more and better information about the 'new genetics'. Clearly the public ought to be well and honestly informed about developments in genetic science and technology and be able, if they choose, to engage in meaningful debate, but such formulations run the risk of screening out the different ways in which people make sense of genetic technology. This paper will focus on ways in which residents of a town in the north of England explore some of the social and ethical implications of new reproductive and genetic technologies (NRGT). It will argue that there need to be more sophisticated ways of 'hearing' what people say about NRGT.
Jeanette Edwards (Sun,) studied this question.