Now that genetic inheritance is featuring more and more as an explanation of disease and human behaviour in general, a question that needs to be asked is how such explanations affect people's perceptions of family and kinship and to what extent genetic explanations conflict with broader social developments. Ideas about the genetic inheritance of disease place the family and kin group in the spotlight, requiring all its members to be scrutinised. Research on inheritable diseases entails a medicalisation of kinship that reflects and promotes a view of family relationships at odds with the ongoing changes in the structure of families. At a time when family structures are more fluid and less determined by ``blood'' relationships than ever before we have an increasing emphasis on genetic inheritance as the transmitter of both human behaviour and kinship. Embedded in concepts of genetic inheritance is thus the notion that family and kin are the medium through which inheritance flows. Two cases from an anthropological study will illustrate how genetic mapping leads to the medicalisation of kinship.
Dolgin JLDefining the family: law, technology, and reproduction in an uneasy age. New York: New York University Press, 1997.
2.
Franklin S.Embodied progress: a cultural account of assisted conception. New York: Routledge, 1997.
3.
Hubbard R., Wald E.Exploding the gene myth: how genetic information is produced and manipulated by scientists, physicians, lawyers, insurance companies, educators and law enforcers. Boston: Beacon Press , 1997.
4.
Kevles DJ, Hood L , eds. The code of codes: scientific and social issues in the Human Genome Project. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992.
5.
Lewontin RCBiology as ideology. New York: Harper Perennial, 1992.
6.
Nelkin D., Lindee S.The DNA mystique: the gene as a cultural icon. New York : WH Freeman, 1995.
7.
Strathern M.Reproducing the future: essays on anthropology, kinship and the new reproductive technologies. New York: Routledge , 1992.
8.
Pembrey M.The new genetics: a user's guide. In: Marteau T, Richards M, editors. The troubled helix: social and psychological implications of the new human genetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996: 63 - 81.
9.
Richards M.Families, kinship and genetics. In: Marteau T, Richards M, editors. The troubled helix: social and psychological implications of the new human genetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996: 249 - 73.
10.
Finkler K.Experiencing the new genetics: family and kinship on the medical frontier . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000.
11.
Finkler K.The kin in the gene: the medicalization of family and kinship in American society. Curr Anthropol2001; 42: 235 - 49.
12.
Sachs L.Risk as diagnosis: implications for the quality of life. In: Levy JA, Jasmin C, Bez G, editors. Cancer, AIDS and quality of life. New York: Plenum Press , 1997: 107 - 13.
13.
Sachs L.Att leva med risk: fem kvinnor, gentester och kunskapens frukter (Living with risk: five women, genetic tests and the fruits of knowledge) (in Swedish) . Stockholm: Gedin Publishers , 1998.
14.
Sachs L.Knowledge of no return: getting and giving information about genetic risk . Acta Oncologica1999; 38: 735 - 41.
15.
Richards M.The new genetics: some issues for social scientists . Sociol Health Illness1993; 15: 567 - 86.
16.
Strathern M.Kinship at the core: an anthropology of Elmdon, a village in Northwest Essex in the nineteen-sixties. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
17.
Strathern M.After nature: English kinship in the late twentieth century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
18.
Levi-Strauss C.The elementary structure of kinship, editor R Needham.Boston: Beacon Press, 1969.
19.
Fortes M., Kinship and the social order: the legacy of Lewis Henry MorganLondon: Routledge and Kegan Paul1970.
20.
Morgan LHThe comparative study of family systems. In: Graburn NHH, editor. Readings in kinship and social structure. New York: Harper & Row, 1971 : 12 - 18.
21.
Boholm Å.Swedish kinship: an exploration into cultural processes of belonging and continuity . Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothenburgensis , 1983.
22.
Pomata G.Blood ties and semen ties: consanguinity and agnation in Roman law . In: Maynes MJ, Waltner A, Soland B, Strasser U, editors. Gender, kinship, power: a comparative and interdisciplinary history. New York: Routledge, 1996: 43 - 66.
23.
Giddens A.The consequences of modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1990.
24.
Giddens A.Modernity and self-identity: self and society in the late modern age . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1991.
25.
Sahlins MDThe use and abuse of biology: an anthropological critique of sociobiology . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1976.
26.
Sachs L., Taube A., Tishelman C.Risk in numbers: difficulties in the transformation of genetic knowledge from research to people. Acta Oncologica2001 ; 4: 445-53.
27.
Rabinow P.Artificiality and enlightenment: from sociobiology to biosociality . In: Crary J, Kwinter S, editors. Incorporations. New York: Urzone Books: 1992.
28.
Latour B.Drawing things together. In: Lynch M, Woolgar S, editors. Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press , 1990.
29.
Ragoné H.Chasing the blood tie. In: Lamphere L, Ragoné H, Zavella P, editors. Situated lives: gender and culture in everyday life. New York: Routledge , 1997: 110-27.
30.
Nelkin D.The social power of genetic information. In: Kevles J, Hood L, editors. The code of codes: scientific and social issues in the Human Genome Project . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992: 177-90.
31.
Nelkin D.The politics of predisposition: the social meaning of predictive biology . In: Heller A, Puntscher S, editors. Biopolitics: the politics of the body, race, and nature. Brookfield, VT: Avenbury, 1996: 537 - 50.
32.
Hubbard R.Outwitting destiny. New Yorker1998 , 16 March.
33.
Markel H.The stigma of disease: implication of genetic screening. Am J Med1992; 93: 209 - 15.
34.
Williams SJ , Calnan M.The limits of medicalization? Modern medicine and the lay populace in late modernity. Soc Sci Med1996; 42: 1609 - 20.
