Psychiatric genetic essentialism and stigma in child custody proceedings: public views.

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2021-08-26 eCollection Date: 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsab026
Maya Sabatello, Audrey Chao, Beverly J Insel, Thomas Corbeil, Bruce G Link, Paul S Appelbaum
{"title":"Psychiatric genetic essentialism and stigma in child custody proceedings: public views.","authors":"Maya Sabatello,&nbsp;Audrey Chao,&nbsp;Beverly J Insel,&nbsp;Thomas Corbeil,&nbsp;Bruce G Link,&nbsp;Paul S Appelbaum","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsab026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The introduction of behavioral, including psychiatric, genetic information in American courts has gained traction but raises concerns of undue influence on judicial outcomes. We conducted a vignette-based survey of a nationally representative sample of US adults to assess how evidence about a parent's psychiatric genetic makeup and explicit and implicit stigmatizing beliefs about psychiatric conditions may affect key decisions in child custody proceedings. Psychiatric genetic evidence did not affect public perspectives on custody decisions, but it increased the genetic essentialist understanding of psychiatric conditions (regardless of a diagnosis). Explicit stigma was associated with a preference to deny parents with a (or with an alleged) psychiatric condition joint custody. Our newly created Implicit Association Test identified an association between psychiatric conditions and perceived bad parenting. Research to identify effective interventions and educational programs to address genetic essentialism and to reduce bias against people, including parents, with psychiatric conditions is urgently needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"8 2","pages":"lsab026"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f4/b8/lsab026.PMC8390126.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsab026","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The introduction of behavioral, including psychiatric, genetic information in American courts has gained traction but raises concerns of undue influence on judicial outcomes. We conducted a vignette-based survey of a nationally representative sample of US adults to assess how evidence about a parent's psychiatric genetic makeup and explicit and implicit stigmatizing beliefs about psychiatric conditions may affect key decisions in child custody proceedings. Psychiatric genetic evidence did not affect public perspectives on custody decisions, but it increased the genetic essentialist understanding of psychiatric conditions (regardless of a diagnosis). Explicit stigma was associated with a preference to deny parents with a (or with an alleged) psychiatric condition joint custody. Our newly created Implicit Association Test identified an association between psychiatric conditions and perceived bad parenting. Research to identify effective interventions and educational programs to address genetic essentialism and to reduce bias against people, including parents, with psychiatric conditions is urgently needed.

Abstract Image

精神病遗传本质主义和儿童监护程序中的耻辱:公众观点。
在美国法院引入行为学信息,包括精神病学信息和遗传信息,已经取得了进展,但也引发了对司法结果产生不当影响的担忧。我们对具有全国代表性的美国成年人样本进行了一项基于小插图的调查,以评估有关父母精神疾病基因构成的证据以及对精神疾病的显性和隐性污名化信念如何影响儿童监护程序中的关键决定。精神病学遗传证据并不影响公众对监护决定的看法,但它增加了对精神疾病的遗传本质主义者的理解(无论诊断如何)。明确的耻辱与倾向于拒绝有(或据称有)精神疾病的父母共同监护有关。我们新创建的内隐联想测试确定了精神状况和感知到的不良教养之间的联系。迫切需要研究确定有效的干预措施和教育计划,以解决遗传本质主义,并减少对患有精神疾病的人(包括父母)的偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信