Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:34:51.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Nationalizing Embryos’: The Politics of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research in Italy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2007

Ingrid Metzler
Ingrid Metzler
Affiliation:
Life-Science-Governance Research Platform, Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitaetsstrasse 7/2, 1010 ViennaAustria E-mail: ingrid.metzler@univie.ac.at
Get access

Abstract

Over the last decade, many European countries have sought to capitalize on the promising opportunities of human embryonic stem cell (HESC) research. Italy, in contrast, has renounced this line of research. HESC research is not altogether forbidden in Italian laboratories, but restricted and not supported by public investment. In this article, I seek to make sense of Italy’s stance. I argue that the politics of human embryonic stem cell research in Italy has arisen as a consequence of the reordering of Italy’s biopolitics through the ‘nationalization’ of Italian embryos. This has deprived Italian laboratories of their research material and given Italian stem cells their particular meaning.

Keywords

biopoliticscitizenshipembryoshuman embryonic stem cell researchItalyreferenda
Type
Articles
Information
BioSocieties , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 413 - 427
Copyright
Copyright © London School of Economics and Political Science 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ADUC (2004a). Italia. Cartello per dire no alla legge sulla procreazione medicalmente assistita. Notiziario Cellule Staminali, III(57). URL (accessed September 2005): staminali.aduc.it/php_newsshow_0_3058.htmlGoogle Scholar
ADUC (2004b). Italia. Luca Coscioni: aboliamo la legge che vieta la ricerca, insieme. Notiziario Cellule Staminali, III(57). URL (accessed July 2007): staminali.aduc.it/php_newsshow_0_3059.htmlGoogle Scholar
Arachi, A. (2004). Fecondazione, il Parlamento vara le regole. Corriere della Sera, 11 February, 3.Google Scholar
Associazione Luca Coscioni (2005). Io voto 4 volte sí. Roma: Associazione Luca Coscioni.Google Scholar
Bonaccorso, M. (2004). Making connections: Family and relatedness in clinics of assisted conception in Italy. Modern Italy, 9, 59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, K. (2005). Not just for experts: The public debate about reprogenetics in Germany. Hastings Center Report, 35, 42–49.Google ScholarPubMed
Camera dei Deputati (2004). Resoconto stenografico dell’Assemblea, Seduta n. 421 del 10 Febbraio 2004. URL (accessed August 2007): www.camera.it/_dati/leg14/lavori/stenografici/sed421/s000r.htmGoogle Scholar
Comitato Scienza & Vita (2005). Comitato ‘Scienza & Vita’ per la Legge 40/2004. Un doppio no alla menzogna (leaflet).Google Scholar
Comitato Scienza & Vita (2006). Referendum 2005 sulla Fecondazione Medicalmente Assistita. Essere umani dall’inizio alla fine. Quattro mesi vissuti intensamente per affermare il primato della vita. Pomezia: La Fenice Grafica.Google Scholar
Coscioni, L. (2003). Il maratoneta. Dal caso pietoso al caso pericoloso. Storia di una battaglia di libertà. Viterbo: Stampa alternativa.Google Scholar
Della Fratina, E. (2005). Formigoni: ‘Mi astengo. Siamo tutti ex embrioni’. Il Giornale, 8 June, 6.Google Scholar
Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, M. (1979). The history of sexuality, vol.1: An introduction. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (2002). Society must be defended: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975–76. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
Franklin, S. (2005). Stem Cells R Us: Emergent life forms and the global biological. In Ong, A.& Collier, S.J.(Eds.), Global assemblages: Technology, politics, and ethics as anthropological problems, 59–78. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Franklin, S. (2007). Dolly mixtures: The remaking of genealogy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Gottweis, H. (2002). Stem cell policies in the United States and in Germany: Between bioethics and regulation. Policy Studies Journal, 30, 444–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottweis, H., & Prainsack, B. (2006). Emotion in political discourse: Contrasting approaches to stem cell governance: The US, UK, Israel and Germany. Regenerative Medicine, 1, 823–829.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottweis, H., Hable, W., Prainsack, B., & Wydra, D. (2004). Verwaltete Körper. Strategien der Gesundheitspolitik im internationalen Vergleich. Vienna: Böhlau Verlag.Google Scholar
Gottweis, H., Salter, B., & Waldby, C. (forthcoming). The global politics of embryonic stem cell science. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hajer, M.A. (2003). Policy without polity: Policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy Sciences, 36, 175–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, V. J., Stojkovic, P., & Stojkovic, M. (2006). Using therapeutic cloning to fight human disease: A conundrum or reality? Stem cells, 24, 1628–1637.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanafin, P. (2006). Gender, citizenship and human reproduction in contemporary Italy. Feminist Legal Studies, 14, 329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauskeller, C. (2004). How traditions of ethical reasoning and institutional processes shape stem cell research in Britain. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 29, 509–532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herrera, S. (2005). Leaders and laggards in the stem cell enterprise. Nature Biotechnology, 23, 775–777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hochedlinger, K., & Jaenisch, R. (2006). Nuclear reprogramming and pluripotency. Nature, 441(29 June), 1061–1067.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Il Foglio (2005). Embrione über alles. Il Foglio, 14 June, 1.Google Scholar
Jasanoff, S. (2005a). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jasanoff, S. (2005b). In the democracies of DNA: Ontological uncertainty and political order in three states. New Genetics and Society, 34, 139–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, E.L. (2005). A crisis of births: Population politics and family-making in Italy. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.Google Scholar
La Repubblica.it (2004). Via libera della Camera. La procreazione assistita è legge. 10 Feburary. URL (accessed August 2007): www.repubblica.it/2004/b/sezioni/cronaca/fecondavoto/fecondavoto/fecondavoto.htmlGoogle Scholar
La Repubblica.it (2005). Ruini festeggia la vittoria, ‘Italiani, popolo maturo’. 13 June. URL (accessed June 2005): www.repubblica.it/2005/f/sezioni/politica/dossifeconda6/rearui/rearui.htmlGoogle Scholar
Landecker, H. (2007). Culturing life: How cells became technologies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemke, T. (2004). Veranlagung und Verantwortung. Genetische Diagnostik zwischen Selbstbestimmung und Schicksal. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.Google Scholar
Lemke, T. (2007). Gouvernementalität und Biopolitik. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
Lewis, R. (2007). The hard cell. Nature, 447, 748–749.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loeber, A., Hajer, M., & van Tatenhove, J. (2005). Investigating new participatory practices of the ‘politics of life’ in a European context. URL (accessed September 2007): www.univie.ac.at/LSG/paganini/pdfs/Deliverable5_final.pdfGoogle Scholar
Mafai, M. (2004a). Una norma che ignora il paese reale. La Repubblica, 11 February, 1.Google Scholar
Mafai, M. (2004b). Una legge ideologica, iniqua e crudele così è violata la dignità della donna. La Repubblica, 26 May.Google Scholar
Marchesi, M. (2007). From adulterous gametes to heterologous nation: Tracing the boundaries of reproduction in Italy. Reconstruction, 7. URL (accessed April 2007): reconstruction.eserver.org/071/marchesi.shtmlGoogle Scholar
Minerva, D. (2004). Da laico vi dico: È una barbarie. L’Espresso, 24 August.Google Scholar
Ministero della Sanità (2000). Relazione della Commissione di studio sull’utilizzo di cellule staminali per finalità terapeutiche. URL (accessed August 2007): www.ministerosalute.it/imgs/C_17_bacheca_10_listaelencodocumenti_elenco1_listadocumenti_documento0_listafile_file0_linkfile.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ministero della Salute (2001). Ordinanza 21 dicembre 2001. Proroga dell’efficacia dell’ordinanza concernente il divieto di pratiche di clonazione umana. Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, no. 30, 5 February 2002.Google Scholar
Ministero della Salute (2004). Decreto 4 agosto 2004, Norme in materia di procreazione medicalmente assistita, emanato ai sensi dell’articolo 17, comma 3, della legge 40/2005. Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, no. 200, 26 August.Google Scholar
Ministero della Sanità (1985). Circolare 1/3/1985 su ‘Limiti e condizioni di legittimità dei servizi per l’inseminazione artificiale nell’ambito del Servizio Sanitario Aziendale’. In F. Luzi, (Ed.), Riproduzione umana assistita ed embriologia, 157–162. Roma: Senato della Repubblica.Google Scholar
Ministero della Sanità (1997). Ordinanza 5 marzo 1997. Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, no. 55, 7 March.Google Scholar
Nature Cell Biology (2005). Editorial: Embryonic stem cell development(s). Nature Cell Biology , 7, 845.Google Scholar
Negrotti, E. (2005). L’orfanotrofio degli embrioni abbandonati. Noi Genitori & Figli, Supplemento ad Avvenire, viii–ix.Google Scholar
Neresini, F. (2000). And man descended from the sheep: The public debate on cloning in the Italian press. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 359–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novas, C., & Rose, N. (2000). Genetic risks and the birth of the somatic individual. Economy and Society, 29, 485–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okarma, T. (2001). Human embryonic stem cells: A primer on the technology and its medical application. In S. Holland, K. Lebacqz, & L. Zoloth, (Eds.), The human embryonic stem cell debate: Science, ethics, and public policy, 3–13. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petryna, A. (2002). Life exposed: Biological citizens after Chernobyl. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pizzato, P. (2004). Fecondazione assistita come la pena di morte. Corriere della Sera,12 February. URL (accessed October 2006): sitesearch.corriere.it/engineDocumentServlet.jsp?docUrl=/documenti_globnet5/mondo_corriere/Italians/2004/02/12/03040212.xml&templateUrl=/motoriverticali/italians/risultato.jspGoogle Scholar
Prainsack, B. (2006). ‘Negotiating life’: The regulation of human cloning and embryonic stem cell research in Israel. Social Studies of Science, 36, 173–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quaranta, P. (2006). TEMPO SCADUTO! Le parole di Luca Coscioni. il ‘Cassero’ magazine, 9 March.Google Scholar
Ramjoué, C., & Klöti, U. (2003). Assisted reproductive technology policy in Italy: Explaining the lack of comprehensive regulation. In I. Bleiklie, M. Goggin, & C. Rothmayr, (Eds.), Comparative biomedical policy: How European and North American countries govern assisted reproductive technologies. A cross-country comparison , 42–63. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Repubblica Italiana (2004). Legge 19 febbraio 2004, no. 40: Norme in materia di procreazione medicalmente assistita. Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, no. 45, 24 February.Google Scholar
Rose, N. (2001). The politics of life itself. Theory, Culture & Society, 18(6), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, N. (2007). The politics of life itself: Biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, N., & Novas, C. (2005). Biological citizenship. InOng, A. & Collier, S.J. (Eds.), Global Assemblages. Technology, Politics and Ethics as Anthropological Problems, 439–463. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Salter, B. (2007). Bioethics and the EU’s Framework Programmes. Global Biopolitics Research Group Working Papers, Working Paper No. 21. URL (accessed July 2007): www.ioh.uea.ac.uk/biopolitics/wp_21/wp_21.pdfGoogle Scholar
Saraceno, C. (1998). Mutamenti della famiglia e politiche sociali in Italia. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
SATduemila, & Scienza & Vita (2005a). Dalla diagnosi prenatale alla diagnosi preimpianto (videotape). Roma: Rete Blue S.p.A.Google Scholar
SATduemila, & Scienza & Vita (2005b). Sperimentazione sull’embrione: Diritti del concepito e salute della donna (videotape). Roma: Rete Blue S.p.A.Google Scholar
Sperling, S. (2004). From crisis to potentiality: Managing potential selves. Stem cells, immigrants, and German identity. Science and Public Policy, 31, 139–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spinelli, A., Scaravelli, G., Vigiliano, V., & Diemoz, S. (2003). Indagine sull’attività di procreazione medicalmente assistita in Italia. Rapporti ISTISAN, 03/14. Roma: Istituto Superiore di Sanità.Google Scholar
Testa, G. (2006). Che cos’è un clone? Pratiche e significato delle biotecnologie rosse in un mondo globale. InBucchi, M. & Neresini, F. (Eds.), Cellule e cittadini: Biotecnologie nello spazio pubblico, 141–162. Milano: Sironi Editore.Google Scholar
Thomson, J.A., Itskovitz-Eldor, J., Shapiro, S.S., Waknitz, M.A., Swiergiel, J.J., Marshall, V.S. et al. (1998). Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science, 282(5391), 1145–1147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valentini, C. (2004). La fecondazione proibita. Milano: Giangiacomo Feltrinelli Editore.Google Scholar
Vats, A., Bielby, R.C., Tolley, N.S., Nerem, R., & Polak, J.M. (2005). Stem cells. Lancet, 366, 592–602.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vescovi, A. (2005). Bugie staminali. Il Foglio, 22 January.Google Scholar
Waldby, C. (2002). Stem cells, tissue cultures and the production of biovalue. Health, 6, 305–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldby, C. (2005). Stem cell research, biopolitics and globalization. Global Biopolitics Research Group Working Papers, Working Paper No. 4. URL (accessed August 2007): www.ioh.uea.ac.uk/biopolitics/workingpapers_pdf/wp4.pdfGoogle Scholar
Wilmut, I., & Highflied, R. (2006). After Dolly: The uses and misuses of human cloning. London: Little, Brown Book Group.Google Scholar