Ethics, genetic testing, and athletic talent: children's best interests, and the right to an open (athletic) future

In this paper we discuss the ethics of genetics-based talent identification programs in sports. We discuss the validity and reliability of the tests and the claims made by direct to consumer companies, before presenting a range of ethical issues concerning child-parent/guardian relations raised by these tests, which we frame in terms of parental/guardian duties, children's rights, and best interests. We argue that greater ethical emphasis needs to be put on the parental decision on the wellbeing on the child going forward, not on ex post justifications on the basis of good and bad consequences. Best interests decisions made by a third party seem to comprise both subjective and objective elements, but only a holistic approach can do justice to these questions by addressing the wellbeing of the child in a temporal manner and taking into account the child's perspective on its wellbeing. Such decisions must address wider questions of what a good (sports)parent ought do to help the child flourish and how to balance the future-adult focus necessary to nurture talent with the wellbeing of the child in the present. We conclude that current genetic tests for “talent” do not predict aptitude or success to any significant degree and are therefore only marginally pertinent for talent identification. Claims that go beyond current science are culpable and attempt to exploit widespread but naïve perceptions of the efficacy of genetics information to predict athletic futures. Sports physicians and health care professionals involved in sport medicine should therefore discourage the use of these tests

Family display, family type, or community? Limitations in the application of a concept

In this paper we develop the concept of family display by responding to David Morgan’s suggestion that researchers should consider whether ‘family displays’ are used to convey a ‘type’ of Family. We do so by applying the concept to the accounts of migrant family children living in an English city, and those of adults that grew-up in Mennonite communities in Mexico and Canada. Analysis uniquely shows that migrant family children do display a type of ‘Family’, and that this is influenced by familial constructs privileged by intended audiences. We contribute further by arguing that whilst some families do display core values attached to Family ‘types’, this is not the case in the example of the Mennonite community and researchers should be cognisant of applying this concept to all contexts. This is because the priority for display may not be the presentation of legitimate Family, but other features of collective identity

Exponential sum approximations for t−βt^{-\beta}

Given $\beta>0$ and $\delta>0$, the function $t^{-\beta}$ may be approximated for $t$ in a compact interval $[\delta,T]$ by a sum of terms of the form $we^{-at}$, with parameters $w>0$ and $a>0$. One such an approximation, studied by Beylkin and Monz\'on, is obtained by applying the trapezoidal rule to an integral representation of $t^{-\beta}$, after which Prony's method is applied to reduce the number of terms in the sum with essentially no loss of accuracy. We review this method, and then describe a similar approach based on an alternative integral representation. The main difference is that the new approach achieves much better results before the application of Prony's method; after applying Prony's method the performance of both is much the same.Comment: 18 pages, 5 figures. I have completely rewritten this paper because after uploading the previous version I realised that there is a much better approach. Note the change to the title. Have included minor corrections following revie

Alternative pathways to traditional destinations : higher education for disadvantaged Australians

In 1985, the Higher Education Equity Program was introduced by the Australian Government to improve the participation of those persons from social groups traditionally under-represented within higher education. In 1990, the program was incorporated within A Fair Chance For All which provided more specific details of the government\u27s desire for a system-wide approach to equity issues. One result has been the proliferation of access and equity programs conducted by universities around the country and aimed at redressing the disadvantage of potential students. The alleged success of these programs is based on greater participation in and graduation from Australian universities by individuals from targeted disadvantaged groups. The research reported here, however, would suggest that such programs are prone to co-opt the language of equity and social justice, dependent as they are on satisfying statistically-orientated program performance indicators in order to receive recurrent government funding. Further, the paper argues that success in achieving equity within Australian higher education will remain limited unless the structural arrangements that work to construct social inequalities in mainstream higher education are addressed

Toward Transformative Dialogue

Drawing from a social constructionist theoroetical orientation and a range of congenial practices, we propose the concept of transformative dialogue which stresses relational responsibility, self-expression, affirmation, coordination, relfexivity, and the co-creation of new realities. We see conversational moves that accomplish these aims as highly promising; at the same time there is no attempt in the present article to suggest these as ultimate solutions to employ in situations of conflict. The present is an attempt to generate a potentially useful vocabulary rather than a strict set of rules for negotiating among incommensurate realities

Toward a vocabulary of transformative dialogue

Most of us feel more comfortable in certain groups than others, and indeed find certain people just plain wrong headed or evil - perhaps neo-Nazis, the KKK, the Mafia, terrorist groups. This sense of alterity - distance or separation from particular others - is virtually an inevitable outcome of social life. As we come to generate realities and moralities within specific groups - families, friendships, the workplace, the religious setting - so do our interlocutors become invaluable resources. With their support - either explicit or implicit - we gain the sense of who we are, what is real, and what is right. At the same time, all world constructions and their associated forms of relational life create a devalued exterior - a realm that is not us, not what we believe, not true, not good. In important degree this devaluation derives from the structure of language out of which we construct our realities. Language is essentially a differentiating medium, with every word separating that which is named or indicated from that which is not (absent, contrary). Thus, whenever we declare what is the case or what is good, we use words that privilege certain existents while thrusting the absent and the contrary to the margins. An emphasis on the material basis of reality suppresses or devalues the spiritual; an emphasis on the world as observed subtlety undermines beliefs in the unseen and intuitive, and so on. In effect, for every reality there is alterity. These proposals are all congenial to a view of reality as socially constructed (see Gergen, 1994). The problem of difference is intensified by several ancillary tendencies. First, there is a tendency to avoid those who are different, and particularly when they seem antagonistic to one's way of life. We avoid meetings, conversations, and social gatherings. With less opportunity for interchange, there is secondly a tendency for accounts of the other to become simplified. There are few challenges to one's descriptions and explanations; fewer exceptions are made. Third, with the continuing tendency to explain others' actions in a negative way, there is a movement toward extremity. As we continue to locate "the evil" in the other's actions, there is an accumulation; slowly the other takes on the shape of the inferior, the stupid or the villainous. Social psychologists often speak in this context of "negative stereotyping," that is, rigid and simplified conceptions of the other. All such tendencies lead to social atomization, with the same processes that separate cliques and gangs in adolescence reflected organizationally as tensions between management and workers or line and staff; and at the societal level as conflicts between the political left and right, fundamentalists vs. liberals, gay rights and anti-gays, and pro-choice vs. prolife. And more globally we find similar tendencies separating Jews and Palestinians, Irish Catholics vs. Protestants, Muslims vs. Christians, and so on. On this account tendencies toward division and conflict are normal outgrowths of social interchange. Prejudice is not, then, a manifestation of flawed character - inner rigidities, decomposed cognition, emotional biases, and the like. Rather, so long as we continue the normal process of creating consensus around what is real and good, classes of the undesirable are under production. Wherever there are tendencies toward unity, cohesion, brotherhood, commitment, solidarity, or community, so are the seeds of alterity and conflict sewn. In the present condition, virtually none of us escape from being undesirable to at least one (and probably many) other groups. The major challenge that confronts us, then, is not that of generating warm and cozy communities, conflict-free societies, or a harmonious world order. Rather, given the endemic character of conflict, how do we proceed in such a way that ever emerging antagonism does not yield aggression, oppression, or genocide - in effect, the end of meaning altogether. This challenge is all the more daunting in a world where communication technology allows increasing numbers of groups to organize, mold common identities, set agendas and take action (1). Perhaps the major challenge for the 21st century is how we shall manage to live together on the globe. What resources are available to us in confronting this challenge? At least one important possibility is suggested by the social constructionist posture that frames the above account: if it is through dialogue that the grounds for conflict emerge, then dialogue may be our best option for treating contentious realities. Yet, in spite of the broad significance attached to the term, "dialogue," little is gained by invoking its power. More formally, dialogue is simply "a conversation between two or more persons." And indeed, it is ultimately impossible to distinguish between dialogue and its other, namely monologue. For even monologue is addressed to someone - either present or implied. And even should the recipient remain silent, responses do occur - privately to one's interlocutor or more publicly to concerned others. Thus, to make headway here it is essential to distinguish among specific forms of dialogue. Not all dialogic processes may be useful in reducing the potential for hostility, conflict, and aggression. Indeed conversations dominated by critical exchanges, saber rattling, and contentious demands may only exacerbate the conflict. It is in this context that I wish to put forth the concept and practice of transformative dialogue. Transformative dialogue may be viewed as any form of interchange that succeeds in transforming a relationship between those committed to otherwise separate and antagonistic realities (and their related practices) to one in which common and solidifying realities are under construction

Toward Transformative Dialogue

Drawing from a social constructionist theoretical orientation, and a range of congenial practices, we propose the concept of transformative dialogue which stresses relational responsibility, self-expression, affirmation, coordination, reflexivity, and the co-creation of new realities. We see conversational moves that accomplish these aims as highly promising; at the same time there is no attempt in the present article to suggest these as ultimate solutions to employ in situations of conflict. The present is an attempt to generate a potentially useful vocabulary rather than a strict set of rules for negotiating among incommensurate realities

Ethics, Genetic Technologies and Equine Sports: The Prospect of Regulation of a Modified Therapeutic Use Exemption Policy

This article critically reviews the current availability and selected use of genetic technologies for horses, before undertaking an ethical evaluation of current practice and regulatory positions in comparative relation to debates surrounding genetic testing, pre-implantation genetic testing and gene editing in humans. We argue that genetic testing for hereditary disorders is not only justified but should be encouraged on welfare grounds and that genetic testing for performance traits is ethically permissible based on a restricted imperative to genetically edit horses and horse embryos to reduce genetic predisposition to disease and injury. Given the current state of the science, where the effects of gene editing on health and welfare are currently undetermined, space is created for an analytical distinction between equine gene editing for ‘treatment’ and for ‘enhancement’. Gene editing is only justified for purposes of correcting/preventing disease and injury. Current regulation is challenged by apparently conflicting welfare-based ethical imperatives with respect to welfare-based gene editing. We propose modifications to the blanket bans on gene editing with a case-by-case assessment of applications to permit gene editing, based on best welfare interests underwritten by the aim of facilitating fair sport that adapt WADAs International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, adding an important reporting element. We reject the use of gene editing to obtain currently prohibited competitive advantages. In order to safeguard the welfare of human and equine athletes, we argue that regulatory institutions should urgently collaborate to develop cross-sport international regulations for the use of gene editing, including obligatory reporting of data about the health and welfare of genetically edited horses

Case-control study of stroke and the quality of hypertension control in north west England

Objective: To examine the risk of stroke in relation to quality of hypertension control in routine general practice across an entire health district. Design: Population based matched case-control study. Setting: East Lancashire Health District with a participating population of 388,821 aged < or = 80. Subjects: Cases were patients under 80 with their first stroke identified from a population based stroke register between 1 July 1994 and 30 June 1995. For each case two controls matched with the case for age and sex were selected from the same practice register. Hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure > or = 160 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure > or = 95 mm Hg, or both, on at least two occasions within any three month period or any history of treatment with antihypertensive drugs. Main outcome measures: Prevalence of hypertension and quality of control of hypertension assessed by using the mean blood pressure recorded before stroke) and odds ratios of stroke (derived from conditional logistic regression). Results: Records of 267 cases and 534 controls were examined; 61% and 42% of these subjects respectively were hypertensive. Compared with non-hypertensive subjects hypertensive patients receiving treatment whose average pre-event systolic blood pressure was controlled to or = 160 mm Hg) or untreated had progressively raised odds ratios of 1.6, 2.2, 3.2, and 3.5 respectively. Results for diastolic pressure were similar; both were independent of initial pressures before treatment. Around 21% of strokes were thus attributable to inadequate control with treatment, or 46 first events yearly per 100,000 population aged 40-79. Conclusions: Risk of stroke was clearly related to quality of control of blood pressure with treatment. In routine practice consistent control of blood pressure to below 150/90 mm Hg seems to be required for optimal stroke prevention

Ethics, evidence based sports medicine, and the use of platelet rich plasma in the English Premier League

The use of platelet rich plasma (PRP) as a novel treatment is discussed in the context of a qualitative research study comprising 38 interviews with sports medicine practitioners and other stakeholders working within the English Premier League during the 2013-16 seasons. Analysis of the data produced several overarching themes: conservatism versus experimentalism in medical attitudes; therapy perspectives divergence; conflicting versions of appropriate evidence; subcultures; community beliefs/practices; and negotiation of medical decision-making. The contested evidence base for the efficacy of PRP is presented in the context of a broader professional shift towards evidence based medicine within sports medicine. Many of the participants while accepting this shift are still committed to casuistic practices where clinical judgment is flexible and does not recognize a context-free hierarchy of evidentiary standards to ethically justifiable practice. We also discuss a tendency in the data collected to consider the use of deceptive, placebo-like, practices among the clinician participants that challenge dominant understandings of informed consent in medical ethics. We conclude that the complex relation between evidence and ethics requires greater critical scrutiny for this emerging specialism within the medical community