Body Temples and Biobanks
Ann Mongoven, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Professor, Department of Religious Studies, Michigan State University
Biobanking is booming, scientifically, institutionally, and metaphorically. (Indeed, "biobank" is a provocative commercial metaphor.) Systematically archived repositories of biological specimens that can be linked to other health data offer novel ways of studying health and disease. They also pose ethical challenges. These challenges generally have been discussed according to frameworks of philosophical bioethics and social sciences, including informed consent, privacy and confidentiality, fair distribution of research risks and benefits, research oversight, and democratic governance. However, biobanking’s religious implications, and how that influences public participation and understanding of biobanking, has not been addressed.
I adopt a “religious studies” approach to exploring social implications of biobanking. I first look at “thick religion”—how people contextualize biobanking within their religious orientations. By drawing both on literature and on an empirical case study (conversations surrounding the Michigan BioTrust for Health), I foreground how religiosity fundamentally shapes interpretations of biobanking. I then analyze the language of biobanking as a symbol- system. I critiques current metaphors by which practices of biobanking are understood. I also flag symbolic dissonance between metaphors used by donors, researchers, and administrators to understand the practice of biobanking.
Biobanking is booming, scientifically, institutionally, and metaphorically. (Indeed, "biobank" is a provocative commercial metaphor.) Systematically archived repositories of biological specimens that can be linked to other health data offer novel ways of studying health and disease. They also pose ethical challenges. These challenges generally have been discussed according to frameworks of philosophical bioethics and social sciences, including informed consent, privacy and confidentiality, fair distribution of research risks and benefits, research oversight, and democratic governance. However, biobanking’s religious implications, and how that influences public participation and understanding of biobanking, has not been addressed.
I adopt a “religious studies” approach to exploring social implications of biobanking. I first look at “thick religion”—how people contextualize biobanking within their religious orientations. By drawing both on literature and on an empirical case study (conversations surrounding the Michigan BioTrust for Health), I foreground how religiosity fundamentally shapes interpretations of biobanking. I then analyze the language of biobanking as a symbol- system. I critiques current metaphors by which practices of biobanking are understood. I also flag symbolic dissonance between metaphors used by donors, researchers, and administrators to understand the practice of biobanking.