A discourse-theoretic perspective on the bioethical-legal framework of genetic counseling

The reflexive nature of reason and the unique relationship reason shares with autonomy in Kant's philosophy is the theoretical basis of this dissertation. The principle of respect for autonomy undergirds the two main legal and ethical tenets of genetic counseling, an emerging profession trying to accommodate the sweeping changes that have occurred in clinical genetics, clinical ethics, and case law applicable to medicine. These two tenets of the counseling profession, informed consent and nondirectiveness, both share a principlist interpretation of autonomy that I argue is flawed due to its connection to: instrumental forms of reasoning, empirical theories of action supporting rational choice, and a liberal paradigm of law. I offer an alternative bioethical-legal framework that is based in the Kantian tradition in law and ethics through the complex theories of Jurgen Habermas. Following Habermas's reconstruction of the mutually constituting notions of private and public autonomy, I will argue for a richer conceptualization of autonomy that can have significant implications for the legal and bioethical concepts supporting the profession of genetic counseling, and which can ultimately change counseling practice. ^

Industrial benzene emissions in Houston: Legal barriers to reducing a public health threat

Decades of research show that environmental exposure to the chemical benzene is associated with severe carcinogenic, hematoxic and genotoxic effects on the human body. As such, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated the chemical as a Hazardous Air Pollutant and prescribed benzene air concentration guidelines that provide cities with an ideal ambient level to protect human health. However, in Houston, Texas, a city home to the top industrial benzene emitters in the US who undoubtedly contribute greatly to the potentially unsafe levels of ambient benzene, regulations beyond the EPA’s unenforceable guidelines are critical to protecting public health. Despite this, the EPA has failed to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for benzene. States are thus left to regulate air benzene levels on their own; in the case of Texas, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and state legislature have failed to proactively develop legally enforceable policies to reduce major source benzene emissions. This inaction continues to exacerbate a public health problem, which may only be solved through a legal framework that restricts preventable benzene emissions to protect human health and holds industrial companies accountable for violations of such regulations and standards. This analysis explores legal barriers that the City of Houston and other relevant agencies currently face in their attempt to demand and bring about such change. ^