Parliamentary cultures and human embryos: the Dutch and British debates compared

Marta Kirejczyk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Twenty years ago, the technology of in vitro fertilization created a new artefact: the human embryo outside the woman's body. In many countries, political debates developed around this artefact. One of the central questions in these debates is whether it is permissible to use human embryos in research and, if so, under what conditions. To date, no uniform answer to this question has been given by the governments and parliaments of the different nation states. This highlights the importance of national cultures and local dynamics in the process of crafting the space for human embryo research. In this paper I approach the issue of the national context by comparing the Dutch and British parliamentary debates on human embryos. Though some arguments used in both debates were similar, the outcomes were very different. In the UK, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act was passed in 1990. In the Netherlands, several bills on human embryos have been drafted, but each of them was withdrawn from the proceedings before reaching Parliament. To understand the processes which led to these different outcomes, I scrutinize the roles in the Netherlands of the political parties, of the scientists' lobby and of women speakers, and compare them with the findings on the UK debate. I also reflect upon the rBle played by gender in these two culturally different political contexts.
Original languageUndefined
Pages (from-to)889-912
Number of pages24
JournalSocial studies of science
Volume29
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1999

Keywords

  • METIS-149024
  • IR-58261

Cite this

@article{459124127af44360aa92bf875291a7ef,
title = "Parliamentary cultures and human embryos: the Dutch and British debates compared",
abstract = "Twenty years ago, the technology of in vitro fertilization created a new artefact: the human embryo outside the woman's body. In many countries, political debates developed around this artefact. One of the central questions in these debates is whether it is permissible to use human embryos in research and, if so, under what conditions. To date, no uniform answer to this question has been given by the governments and parliaments of the different nation states. This highlights the importance of national cultures and local dynamics in the process of crafting the space for human embryo research. In this paper I approach the issue of the national context by comparing the Dutch and British parliamentary debates on human embryos. Though some arguments used in both debates were similar, the outcomes were very different. In the UK, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act was passed in 1990. In the Netherlands, several bills on human embryos have been drafted, but each of them was withdrawn from the proceedings before reaching Parliament. To understand the processes which led to these different outcomes, I scrutinize the roles in the Netherlands of the political parties, of the scientists' lobby and of women speakers, and compare them with the findings on the UK debate. I also reflect upon the rBle played by gender in these two culturally different political contexts.",
keywords = "METIS-149024, IR-58261",
author = "Marta Kirejczyk",
year = "1999",
doi = "10.1177/030631299029006004",
language = "Undefined",
volume = "29",
pages = "889--912",
journal = "Social studies of science",
issn = "0306-3127",
publisher = "SAGE Publications",
number = "6",

}

Parliamentary cultures and human embryos: the Dutch and British debates compared. / Kirejczyk, Marta.

In: Social studies of science, Vol. 29, No. 6, 1999, p. 889-912.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Parliamentary cultures and human embryos: the Dutch and British debates compared

AU - Kirejczyk, Marta

PY - 1999

Y1 - 1999

N2 - Twenty years ago, the technology of in vitro fertilization created a new artefact: the human embryo outside the woman's body. In many countries, political debates developed around this artefact. One of the central questions in these debates is whether it is permissible to use human embryos in research and, if so, under what conditions. To date, no uniform answer to this question has been given by the governments and parliaments of the different nation states. This highlights the importance of national cultures and local dynamics in the process of crafting the space for human embryo research. In this paper I approach the issue of the national context by comparing the Dutch and British parliamentary debates on human embryos. Though some arguments used in both debates were similar, the outcomes were very different. In the UK, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act was passed in 1990. In the Netherlands, several bills on human embryos have been drafted, but each of them was withdrawn from the proceedings before reaching Parliament. To understand the processes which led to these different outcomes, I scrutinize the roles in the Netherlands of the political parties, of the scientists' lobby and of women speakers, and compare them with the findings on the UK debate. I also reflect upon the rBle played by gender in these two culturally different political contexts.

AB - Twenty years ago, the technology of in vitro fertilization created a new artefact: the human embryo outside the woman's body. In many countries, political debates developed around this artefact. One of the central questions in these debates is whether it is permissible to use human embryos in research and, if so, under what conditions. To date, no uniform answer to this question has been given by the governments and parliaments of the different nation states. This highlights the importance of national cultures and local dynamics in the process of crafting the space for human embryo research. In this paper I approach the issue of the national context by comparing the Dutch and British parliamentary debates on human embryos. Though some arguments used in both debates were similar, the outcomes were very different. In the UK, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act was passed in 1990. In the Netherlands, several bills on human embryos have been drafted, but each of them was withdrawn from the proceedings before reaching Parliament. To understand the processes which led to these different outcomes, I scrutinize the roles in the Netherlands of the political parties, of the scientists' lobby and of women speakers, and compare them with the findings on the UK debate. I also reflect upon the rBle played by gender in these two culturally different political contexts.

KW - METIS-149024

KW - IR-58261

U2 - 10.1177/030631299029006004

DO - 10.1177/030631299029006004

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 889

EP - 912

JO - Social studies of science

JF - Social studies of science

SN - 0306-3127

IS - 6

ER -