Search results

This chapter discusses an instance of spectacular reproduction that circulated in US media during the late 2010s. Through the use of commercial DNA tests, it was revealed that a fertility doctor, Donald Cline, had used his own sperm to impregnate scores of women who had sought fertility treatment from him during the 1980s. More than 60 biogenetic children, now in their mid to late 30s, were identified by early 2020. This instance illustrates several concepts and concerns that might further guide the social and cultural study of human reproduction and especially the uses of reproductive technologies: (1) Most of us encounter instances of extraordinary reproduction from a mediated distance, yet they may shape and inform our expectations and experiences of ordinary reproduction in our everyday lives. How might the concept of spectacle help us understand what is perceived and understood about reproductive technologies? (2) Reproductive technologies offer ‘fixes’ for disruptions of not only reproduction but also kinship. A focus of this chapter is on genetic genealogy tests as a re(tro)productive technology, which produces children, parents, and kinship in hindsight. (3) The social and cultural study of reproductive technologies ought to take a longitudinal approach that both includes a lifecourse perspective and takes into account the historical contexts in which the technologies become developed and individuals encounter them.

Risk notification is part of a focus on preventive medicine that is dominant in contemporary Western biomedicine. Genomics has forecasted great advances in alleviating disease and prolonging human life, moving from a reactive to a preventative practice. However, in doing so, genomics redraws boundaries, potentially classifying all people as possible carriers of malfunctioning genes. This chapter presents a critical review of the practice of ‘risk notification’ as undertaken by familial cancer genetic testing services, focusing on the right to be informed or not to be informed and implications of knowing.

With backgrounds in anthropology, psychology and public health, the authors draw upon literature around risk notification from a range of disciplines.

In the context of familial cancer, clients may be asked to provide contact information for biological family members to inform them of their potential genetic risk. Through these processes a number of tensions and issues may emerge that relate to fundamental bioethical principles. The ability and decision whether to know, or conversely, to not know, is ethically fraught. We consider the roles and rights of family members and clients, as well as the broader goal of population health.

While much attention has been devoted to clients’ right to know in the context of medical research and treatment, relatively little work has examined the right not to know and adverse consequences of knowing. This review addresses concerns which have rarely been critically examined and debated in the context of risk notification of biological family members.

The purpose of this paper is to inform or alert readers to the extensive use and ready availability of genetic information that poses varying degrees of social and legal danger. The eugenics movement of the 1920s and the general acceptance of genetic essentialism provide context for considering contemporary examples of the problem.

This paper takes an argumentative approach, supporting proposals with ideas from historical and current research literature.

The limits of data protection, extensive use of direct-to-consumer genetic testing and use of genetic information in white nationalist circles portend a resurgence of eugenic beliefs from a century ago.

Research-based recommendations may help to avoid extreme consequences by encouraging people to make informed decisions about the use of genetic information.

The paper counterposes contemporary understanding of genetic testing and data accessibility with the much older ideology of eugenics, leading to concerns about how white nationalists might further their aims with 21st century technology.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the data connection, spatial distribution characteristics and trends in genealogical information. First, it implements a spatial-temporal visualization of the Hakka genealogical information system that makes these individual family pedigree charts appear as one seamless genealogy to family and researchers seeking connections and family history all over the world. Second, this study applies migration analysis by applying big data technologies to Hakka genealogies to investigate the migration patterns of the Hakka ethnic group in Taiwan between 1954 and 2014. This innovative library service enhances the Hakka genealogical migration analysis using big data.

The platform is designed for the exchange of genealogical data to be used in big data analysis. This study integrates big data and geographic information systems (GIS) to map the population distribution themes. The general procedure included collecting genealogical big data, geographic encoding, gathering the map information, GIS layer integration and migration map production.

The analytical results demonstrate that big data technology is highly appropriate for family migration history analysis, given the increasing volume, velocity and variety of genealogical data. The spatial-temporal visualization of the genealogical research platform can follow family history and migration paths, and dynamically generate roadmaps to simplify the cartographic steps.

Technology that combines big data and GIS is suitable for performing migration analysis based on genealogy. A web-based application for spatial-temporal genealogical information also demonstrates the contribution of innovative library services.

Big data play a dominant role in library services, and in turn, provide an active library service. These findings indicate that big data technology can provide a suitable tool for improving library services.

Online genealogy and family trees are linked with large-volume, growing data sets that are complex and have multiple, autonomous sources. The migration analysis using big data has the potential to help genealogy researchers to construct minority ethnic history.

This commentary puts forth a conceptual framework, referred to as the consumer, organization, government framework of unintended digital technology service failures, that specifies consumer, organizational and governmental shortcomings that result in digital technologies failing in terms of negatively affecting consumer, communal, national and/or global welfare.

The authors conceptualize an original framework by engaging in a literature review regarding marketplace failures associated with digital service technologies.

The framework shows that three drivers explain why commercial digital technologies often fail. The first driver highlights misuse or criminal intent from individuals. The second involves organizations failing to prevent or to address technology failures. The third pertains to failures that stem from governmental institutions.

The authors encourage researchers to build on their framework by putting forth research questions. To prevent or lessen opportunities for digital technologies to result in service failures, the authors also offer practitioners a “digital technology service failure audit.” This audit shows how digital technology creators and managers can anticipate and address consumer, organizational and governmental factors that often cause digital service technologies failures.

Despite the absence of industry-specific regulations and the existence of some regulatory immunities, digital technology providers have an ethical duty, and may be obligated under applicable tort law principles, to take steps to prevent unintended harm to consumers before launching their service technologies.

This work reveals that digital technologies represent new and different threats to vulnerable consumers, who often rely on, but do not fully understand, these technologies in their everyday living. The framework helps consumers, organizations and government agencies to identify and remedy current and potential instances of harmful digital technologies.

This chapter explores how data-driven methods such as Artificial Intelligence pose real concerns for individual privacy. The current paradigm of collecting data from those using online applications and services is reinforced by significant potential profits that the private sector stands to realize by delivering a broad range of services to users faster and more conveniently. Terms of use and privacy agreements are a common source of confusion, and are written in a way that dulls their impact and dopes most into automatically accepting a certain level of risk in exchange for convenience and “free” access. Third parties, including the government, gain access to these data in numerous ways. If the erosion of individual protections of privacy and the potential dangers this poses to our autonomy and democratic ideals were not alarming enough, the digital surrogate product of “you” that is created from this paradigm might one day freely share thoughts, buying habits, and your pattern of life with whoever owns these data. We use an ethical framework to assess key factors in these issues and discuss some of the dilemmas posed by Artificial Intelligence methods, the current norm of sharing one's data, and what can be done to remind individuals to value privacy. Will our digital surrogate one day need protections too?

Privacy has been understood as about one’s own information, information that is not one’s own is not typically considered with regards to an individual’s privacy. This paper aims to draw attention to this issue for conceptualizing privacy when one’s privacy is breached by others’ information.

To illustrate the issue that others' information can breach one's own privacy, this paper uses real-world applications of forensic genealogy and recommender systems to motivate the discussion.

In both forensic genealogy and recommender systems, the individual’s privacy is breached by information that is not one’s own. The information that breached one’s privacy, by its nature, is beyond the scope of an individual, which is a phenomenon that has already been captured by emerging discussions about group privacy. This paper further argues that the underlying issue reflected by the examples of forensic genealogy is an extreme case even under the consideration of group privacy. This is because, unlike recommender systems that rely on large amounts of data to make inferences about an individual, forensic genealogy exposes one’s identity by using only one other individual’s information. This paper echoes existing discussions that this peculiar situation where others’ information breaches one’s own privacy reveals the problematic nature of conceptualizing privacy relying only on individualistic assumptions. Moreover, this paper suggests a relational perspective as an alternative for theorizing privacy.

This situation that others’ information breached one’s own privacy calls for an updated understanding of not only privacy but also the relationship between the person and their information. Privacy scholars need to renew their ethical language and vocabularies to properly understand the issue, which recent privacy conceptualizations are already doing (e.g. group privacy).

Despite its growing popularity, there is a noticeable absence of references to the inclusion of genealogy and family history studies within the field of digital humanities. New forms of inclusiveness, particularly in production-coding and cultural analysis, closely align genealogy and family history with the core tenants practiced among humanities computing and digital humanities. This paper aims to prove that genealogy as family history should be formally recognized within this cohort, as it can serve as a valuable and innovative partner for advocacy and technological advancement of the field.

By examining the literature, genealogy will be defined according to its use in the digital humanities, as well as its use in family history studies. The core tenants of humanities computing and digital humanities will be identified and compared against the research methodology and technological tools used in genealogy and family history research. The comparison will determine how closely the fields align, and if genealogy defined as family history should be used, and included within the field of digital humanities.

The progression of genealogy and family history from production to cultural analysis corresponds with the transition of production and coding (influenced by humanities computing) to the inclusion of experimental cultural research adopted by the digital humanities. Genealogy’s use of technological tools, such as databases, text encoding, data-text mining, graphic information systems and DNA mapping, demonstrates the use of coding and production. Cultural analysis through demographic study, crowdsourcing and establishing cultural connections illustrates new methods of scholarship, and connects coding and cultural criticism, serving as a bridge between digital humanities and the humanities at large. As genealogy continues to create new partnerships of a collaborative nature, it can, and will, continue to contribute to new areas of study within the field. As these practices continue to converge with the digital humanities, genealogy should be recognized as a partner and member in the digital humanities cohort.

Despite its growing popularity, there is a noticeable absence of references to the inclusion of genealogy and family history studies within the field of the digital humanities. The term genealogy resonates differently within the digital humanities, primarily articulating the history of the field over the study and research of family lineage. This study seeks to demonstrate how genealogy and family history can fit within the digital humanities, providing a new perspective that has not yet been articulated in the scholarly literature.