Debating the Desirability of New Biomedical Technologies: Lessons from the Introduction of Breast Cancer Screening in the Netherlands

Health technology assessment (HTA) was developed in the 1970s and 1980s to facilitate decision making on the desirability of new biomedical technologies. Since then, many of the standard tools and methods of HTA have been criticized for their implicit normativity. At the same time research into the character of technology in practice has motivated philosophers, sociologists and anthropologists to criticize the traditional view of technology as a neutral instrument designed to perform a specific function. Such research suggests that the tools and methods of more traditional forms of HTA are often inspired by an ‘instrumentalist’ conception of technology that does not fit the way technology actually works. This paper explores this hypothesis for a specific case: the assessments and deliberations leading to the introduction of breast cancer screening in the Netherlands. After reconstructing this history of HTA ‘in the making’ the stepwise model of HTA that emerged during the process is discussed. This model was rooted indeed in an instrumentalist conception of technology. However, a more detailed reconstruction of several episodes from this history reveals how the actors already experienced the inadequacy of some of the instrumentalist presuppositions. The historical case thus shows how an instrumentalist conception of technology may result in implicit normative effects. The paper concludes that an instrumentalist view of technology is not a good starting point for HTA and briefly suggests how the fit between HTA methods and the actual character of technology in practice might be improved

Formulation of the Comfort Women Discourse in International Society

Cystic fibrosis (CF) causes a relatively high medical consumption. A large part of the treatment takes place at home. Because data regarding nonhospital care are lacking, we wished to determine the costs of care of patients with CF outside the hospital. A questionnaire was sent to 73 patients with CF from two Dutch hospitals (response rate 64%, 14 children and 33 adults). Average consumption and average costs per patient per year were calculated for children and adults for six categories: non-hospital medical care; domestic help; diet; travelling because of CF; medication; and devices and special facilities at home, work or school. The average non-hospital costs of care amounted to £4,641 per child per year (range £712-13,269) and £10,242 per adult (range £1,653-26,571). Nonhospital medical care for children and adults accounted for, respectively, 8 and 5% of these costs, domestic help for 15 and 9%, diet for 10 and 7%, travelling because of CF for 4 and 8%, medication for 63 and 67%, and devices and special facilities at home, work or school for 1 and 4%. Nonhospital costs of care of cystic fibrosis are very high and amount to 50% of the total (medical and nonmedical) lifetime costs of cystic fibrosis

Informed decision making about predictive DNA tests: arguments for more public visibility of personal deliberations about the good life

Since its advent, predictive DNA testing has been perceived as a technology that may have considerable impact on the quality of people’s life. The decision whether or not to use this technology is up to the individual client. However, to enable well considered decision making both the negative as well as the positive freedom of the individual should be supported. In this paper, we argue that current professional and public discourse on predictive DNA-testing is lacking when it comes to supporting positive freedom, because it is usually framed in terms of risk and risk management. We show how this ‘risk discourse’ steers thinking on the good life in a particular way. We go on to argue that empirical research into the actual deliberation and decision making processes of individuals and families may be used to enrich the environment of personal deliberation in three ways: (1) it points at a richer set of values that deliberators can take into account, (2) it acknowledges the shared nature of genes, and (3) it shows how one might frame decisions in a non-binary way. We argue that the public sharing and discussing of stories about personal deliberations offers valuable input for others who face similar choices: it fosters their positive freedom to shape their view of the good life in relation to DNA-diagnostics. We conclude by offering some suggestions as to how to realize such public sharing of personal stories