Despite almost a century of educational effort, studies of both schoolchildren and adults show that the public understanding of Mendelian genetics is very limited. A similar conclusion is drawn from studies of those who have been offered explanations of inheritance in genetic counselling clinics. The aim of this paper is to provide an explanation of these observations. It is argued that Mendelian explanations of inheritance conflict in a number of ways with a lay knowledge of inheritance that is general in society. Furthermore, it is suggested that lay knowledge is grounded in concepts of kinship which are themselves sustained by everyday social practice and relationships, which may make the lay knowledge of inheritance particularly resistant to change. It is suggested that Mendelian explanations may not be easily assimilated because of the conflicts with pre-existing lay knowledge that an individual holds. Preliminary results are described from an empirical study which tests the hypothesis that ideas of genetic connectedness are derived from concepts of kin relationships. The evidence appears to confirm the hypothesis. Parallels are drawn between the history of the acceptance of Mendel's ideas in the scientific community and the assimilation (or the lack of it) of Mendelian explanations by the public. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of public education in Mendelian genetics in schools and genetic counselling clinics, and the ways in which it could be more effective.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Turney, J. , 1995, Signs of life—taking genetic literacy seriously. The Genetic Engineer and Biotechnologist, 15, 181-186.
2.
House of Commons Science and Technology Committee , 1995, Third Report Human Genetics: the Science and its Consequences, Vol. 1 (London: HMSO).
3.
Clough, E. E. , and Wood-Robinson, C., 1985, Children's understanding of inheritance. Journal of Biological Education, 19, 304-310.
4.
Richards, M. P. M. , and Ponder, M., 1995, Knowledge of inheritance and attitudes to new genetic techniques. Work in progress.
5.
Kargbo, D. B. , Hobbs, E. D., and Erickson, G. L., 1980, Children's beliefs about inherited characteristics. Journal of Biological Education, 14, 137-146.
6.
Lucas, A. , 1987, Public knowledge of biology. Journal of Biological Education, 14, 137-146.
7.
Nelkin, D. , and Lindee, M. S., 1995, The DNA Mystique: the Gene as a Cultural Icon (New York: Freeman).
8.
Durant, J. , Hansen, A., and Bauer, M., 1996, Public and press discourse on the human genome project in Britain. The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics, edited by T. Marteau and M. P. M. Richards (Cambridge University Press).
9.
Ponder, M. , Lee, J., Green, J., and Richards, M., 1996, Family history and perceived vulnerability to some common diseases: a study of young people and their parents. Journal of Medical Genetics (in the press).
10.
Shiloh, S. , 1996, Decision-making in the context of genetic risk. The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics, edited by T. Marteau and M. P. M. Richards (Cambridge University Press).
11.
Longden, B. , 1982, Genetics—are there inherent learning difficulties?Journal of Biological Education, 16, 135-140.
12.
Richards, M. P. M. , 1996, Families, kinship and genetics. The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics, edited by T. Marteau and M. P. M. Richards (Cambridge University Press).
13.
Richards, M. P. M. , Hallowell, N., Green, J. M., Murton, F., and Statham, H., 1995, Counselling families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a psychosocial perspective. Journal of Genetic Counselling, 4, 219-233.
14.
Richards, M. P. M. , 1996, Families, kinship and genetics. The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics, edited by T. Marteau and M. P. M. Richards (Cambridge University Press).
15.
Richards, M. P. M. , Hallowell, N., Green, J. M., Murton, F., and Statham, H., 1995, Counselling families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a psychosocial perspective. Journal of Genetic Counselling, 4, 219-233.
16.
Ponder, M. , Lee, J., Green, J., and Richards, M., 1996, Family history and perceived vulnerability to some common diseases: a study of young people and their parents. Journal of Medical Genetics (in the press).
17.
Richards, M. P. M. , Hallowell, N., Green, J. M., Murton, F., and Statham, H., 1995, Counselling families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a psychosocial perspective. Journal of Genetic Counselling, 4, 219-233.
18.
Rapp, R. , 1995, Heredity, or: revising the facts of life. Naturalizing Power: Essays in Feminist Cultural Analysis, edited by S. Yanagisako and C. Delaney (New York: Routledge).
19.
See also Yanagisako, S. and Delaney, C., 1995, Naturalizing Power: Essays in Feminist Cultural Analysis (New York: Routledge).
20.
Strathern, M. , 1992, After Nature: English Kinship in the Late Twentieth Century (Cambridge University Press), p. 80.
21.
Yanagisako, S. and Delaney, C., 1995, Naturalizing Power: Essays in Feminist Cultural Analysis (New York: Routledge).
22.
see also Richards, M. P. M., 1996, Families, kinship and genetics. The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics, edited by T. Marteau and M. P. M. Richards (Cambridge University Press).
23.
The notion of kinship varies widely between societies. My remarks here should not be taken to extend beyond Western European kinship and societies derived from these. Clearly, if the link between notions of kinship and ideas of inheritance are more general, it would be expected that there will be wide variation in lay knowledge of inheritance across different societies.
24.
See also Lucas, A., 1987, Public knowledge of biology. Journal of Biological Education, 14, 137-146.
25.
Snowdon, C. , and Green, J. M., 1994, New Reproductive Technologies: Attitudes and Experiences of Carriers of Recessive Disorders. Unpublished report, Centre for Family Research, University of Cambridge.
26.
Darwin, C. , 1868, Animals and Plants Under Domestication, Vol. 2 (London: John Murray), p. 357. The `action of the male sexual element on the mother form' refers to the supposed phenomena whereby attributes of a male which had earlier mated with the female were retained by the female and later transmitted to the offspring of another male at a subsequent mating. Darwin was also drawing here on reports that offspring of individuals who had suffered an amputation were born with exactly the same loss of a limb.
27.
Darwin, C. , 1868, Animals and Plants Under Domestication, Vol. 2 (London: John Murray); pp. 374-375.
28.
Robinson, G. , 1979, A Prelude to Genetics: Theories of a Material Substance of Heredity, Darwin to Weismann (Lawrence, Kansas: Colorado Press).
29.
Galton, F. , 1871, Experiments in pangenesis. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (Biology), 19, 393-404.
30.
Darwin, C. , 1871, Pangenesis. Nature, 3, 502-503.
31.
Galton, F. , 1871, Pangenesis. Nature, 4, 5-6.
32.
Darwin was `assured by three medical men of the Jewish faith that circumcision... has produced no inherited effect' but he chose to believe Blumenbach who `asserts that in Germany Jews are often born in a condition rendering circumcision difficult, so that a name is applied to them signifying “born circumcised”.' Darwin, C., 1868, Animals and Plants Under Domestication, Vol. 2 (London: John Murray), p. 23.
33.
and Clough, E. E., and Wood-Robinson, C., 1985, Children's understanding of inheritance. Journal of Biological Education, 19, 304-310. Both these studies included rather Darwinian questions about the offspring of animals who had had their tails surgically removed.
34.
Moore, J. A. , 1994, Science as a Way of Knowing. The Foundation of Modern Biology (Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press).
35.
and Bowler, P. J., 1989, The Mendelian Revolution: the Emergence of Hereditarian Concepts in Modern Science and Society (London: Athlone Press).
36.
Wilson, E. B. , 1895, An Atlas of the Fertilization and Karyokinesis of the Ovum (New York: Columbia University Press), p. 4.
37.
See also Olby, R.C, 1966, The Origins of Mendelism (London: Constable).
38.
Roberts, H. F. , 1929, Plant Hybridization before Mendel (Princeton University Press).
39.
Layton, D. , Jenkins, E., Macgill, S., and Davey, A., 1993, Inarticulate Science? Perspectives on the Public Understanding of Science and Some Implications for Science Education (Driffield, Yorks: Studies in Education Ltd.)
40.
Clough, E. E. , and Wood-Robinson, C., 1985, Children's understanding of inheritance. Journal of Biological Education, 19, 304-310.
41.
Donovan, J. , 1991, Patient education and the consultation: the importance of lay beliefs. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 50, 418-421.
42.
Fogel, T. , 1995, Information metaphors and the human genome project. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 38, 535-547.
43.
Scriver, C. R. , 1993, Human genetics: schoolyard experiences. American Journal of Genetics, 52, 243-245.
44.
Jones, P. , Billet, M., Scotting, P., and Raeburn, S., 1995, Genetic testing in the classroom. British Medical Journal, 311, 1026.
45.
Thom, D. , and Jennings, M., 1996, Human pedigree and the `best stock'—from eugenics to genetics?The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics, edited by T. Marteau and M. P. M. Richards (Cambridge University Press).
46.
Shiloh, S. , 1996, Decision-making in the context of genetic risk. The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics, edited by T. Marteau and M. P. M. Richards (Cambridge University Press).
