Bio

Dr. Daphne Oluwaseun Martschenko (she/hers) is an Assistant Professor at the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics and former co-organizer of the Race, Empire, and Education Research Collective. Her scholarship identifies novel ways to examine and enhance the ethical and socially responsible conduct, translation, and interpretation of human genetic research.

Dr. Martschenko is passionate about fostering public and community engagement with controversial scientific research. She has appeared in the New York Times and on numerous podcasts including Freakonomics Radio. Dr. Martschenko’s work is published in publicly accessible media outlets such as Scientific American and The Conversation. In 2023, she was named one of 10 Scientists to Watch by ScienceNews.

Currently, Dr. Martschenko is writing a book with her friend and colleague Sam Trejo, a quantitative social scientist interested in how social and biological factors jointly shape human development across the life-course. In it, they unpack various social, ethical, and policy issues related to the DNA revolution.

Academic Appointments

Honors & Awards

  • SN Top-10 Scientists to Watch, ScienceNews (June 20, 2023)

Boards, Advisory Committees, Professional Organizations

  • External Advisory Board Member, Leadership in the Equitable and Ethical Design of STEMM Research (2023 - Present)
  • External Advisory Board Member, Undiagnosed Diseases Network (2023 - Present)
  • Member, ClinGen Ancestry and Diversity Working Group (2021 - Present)
  • Board of Directors Member, Blueprint Schools Network (2021 - Present)
  • Steering Committee Member, Wrestling with Social and Behavioral Genomics: Risk, Potential Benefit, and Ethical Responsibility (2020 - 2022)
  • Advisory Committee Member, Enhancing diversity of clinical trials in Duchenne (2022 - 2023)
  • Member, Population Association of America (2023 - Present)
  • Member, American Society for Bioethics and the Humanities (2020 - Present)
  • Member, American Society for Human Genetics (2021 - Present)

Professional Education

  • B.A., Stanford University, Slavic Languages and Literature (2014)
  • B.A., Stanford University, Anthropology (Medical) (2014)
  • M.Phil., University of Cambridge, Politics, Development, and Democratic Education (2016)
  • Ph.D., University of Cambridge, Education (2019)

Contact

  • Academic
    daphnem@stanford.edu
    University - Faculty Department: Pediatrics - Peds/SCBE Position: Assistant Prof.

Additional Info

Links

Projects

  • 1K01HG013352-01, National Human Genome Research Institute (2/6/2024)

    This proposal addresses the ethical, social, and policy implications of an emerging, controversial field of research: social and behavioral genomics (SBG). Using molecular, genome-wide data, SBG examines whether and how genetic differences between individuals shape differences in traits and outcomes such as educational attainment and math ability. Today, SBG is more accessible than ever. Members of the public can easily acquire direct-to-consumer genetic tests for intelligence, math ability, and sexual promiscuity, among others. Despite the growing availability of SBG data, few policies and incentives exist to consider SBG’s downstream implications. Further, there remains a critical lack of breadth regarding who gets to define the harms and benefits of SBG. As such, SBG engenders a host of difficult ELSI questions to be addressed by this K01: What are the downstream implications of social and behavioral genomics as identified by a broader set of stakeholders than ever before (i.e., SBG researchers, journal editors, journalists, members of industry, parents, and educators)? What are stakeholders’ roles in producing, promoting, and/or mitigating the downstream harms and benefits of SBG? How might the potential harms of SBG be mitigated against and its potential benefits promoted? To address these questions, this proposal includes a plan of research that will achieve three aims. Aim 1 will use in-depth, semi-structured interviews to investigate stakeholders’ (i.e., SBG researchers, journal editors, journalists, members of industry, parents, and educators) roles in the conduct and translation of SBG and their perspectives on the downstream harms/benefits of SBG. Aim 2 will adapt The Ethical Matrix to determine stakeholders’ roles in producing, mitigating, and/or promoting SBG’s downstream harms and benefits for the purpose of locating social responsibility. Finally, Aim 3 will draw upon deliberative engagement theory and methods to design, implement, and evaluate a series of participatory sessions that bring a selection of stakeholders interviewed in Aim 1 together to: (1) discuss (dis)agreements about Aim 1 and 2 findings; and (2) identify strategies for mitigating the harms and promoting the benefits of SBG. Building on Dr. Martschenko’s strong background in mixed-methods education research, policy development, and the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of human genetics/genomics, these aims will be achieved with a career development plan that includes required training and coursework in science, technology, and society (STS) studies and deliberative engagement theory and methods. Dr. Martschenko’s career development plan will also strengthen her interdisciplinary ELSI networks. The career development plan is supported by a team of esteemed, interdisciplinary scholars at Stanford University, The Hastings Center, the University of California, San Francisco, and the University of California, Los Angeles: Mildred K. Cho (primary mentor), Erik Parens (co-mentor), Janet Shim (co-mentor), Julie Harris-Wai (co-mentor), Barbara Koenig (advisory committee), Aaron Panofsky (

    Location

    Stanford University

2024-25 Courses

All Publications

  • Increasing equity in science requires better ethics training: A course by trainees, for trainees. Cell genomics Patel, R. A., Ungar, R. A., Pyke, A. L., Adimoelja, A., Chakraborty, M., Cotter, D. J., Freund, M., Goddard, P., Gomez-Stafford, J., Greenwald, E., Higgs, E., Hunter, N., MacKenzie, T. M., Narain, A., Gjorgjieva, T., Martschenko, D. O. 2024: 100554

    Abstract

    Despite the profound impacts of scientific research, few scientists have received the necessary training to productively discuss the ethical and societal implications of their work. To address this critical gap, we-a group of predominantly human genetics trainees-developed a course on genetics, ethics, and society. We intend for this course to serve as a template for other institutions and scientific disciplines. Our curriculum positions human genetics within its historical and societal context and encourages students to evaluate how societal norms and structures impact the conduct of scientific research. We demonstrate the utility of this course via surveys of enrolled students and provide resources and strategies for others hoping to teach a similar course. We conclude by arguing that if we are to work toward rectifying the inequities and injustices produced by our field, we must first learn to view our own research as impacting and being impacted by society.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.xgen.2024.100554

    View details for PubMedID 38697124

  • Including multiracial individuals is crucial for race, ethnicity and ancestry frameworks in genetics and genomics. Nature genetics Martschenko, D. O., Wand, H., Young, J. L., Wojcik, G. L. 2023

    View details for DOI 10.1038/s41588-023-01394-y

    View details for PubMedID 37202500

  • The Value of Intersectionality for Genomic Research on Human Behavior. Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics Matthews, L. J., Martschenko, D. O., Sabatello, M. 2023: 100860

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gim.2023.100860

    View details for PubMedID 37092536

  • Wrestling with Public Input on an Ethical Analysis of Scientific Research. The Hastings Center report Martschenko, D. O., Callier, S. L., Garrison, N. A., Lee, S. S., Turley, P., Meyer, M. N., Parens, E. 2023; 53 Suppl 1: S50-S65

    Abstract

    Bioethicists frequently call for empirical researchers to engage participants and community members in their research, but don't themselves typically engage community members in their normative research. In this article, we describe an effort to include members of the public in normative discussions about the risks, potential benefits, and ethical responsibilities of social and behavioral genomics (SBG) research. We reflect on what might-and might not- be gained from engaging the public in normative scholarship and on lessons learned about public perspectives on the risks and potential benefits of SBG research and the responsible conduct and communication of such research. We also provide procedural lessons for others in bioethics who are interested in engaging members of the public in their research.

    View details for DOI 10.1002/hast.1478

    View details for PubMedID 37079856

  • Data sharing and community-engaged research. Science (New York, N.Y.) Sabatello, M., Martschenko, D. O., Cho, M. K., Brothers, K. B. 2022; 378 (6616): 141-143

    Abstract

    Data sharing must be accompanied by responsibility sharing.

    View details for DOI 10.1126/science.abq6851

    View details for PubMedID 36227983

  • Ethical, anticipatory genomics research on human behavior means celebrating disagreement. HGG advances Martschenko, D. O., Trejo, S. 1800; 3 (1): 100080

    Abstract

    Despite the many social and ethical considerations in human genetics, researchers and communities remain largely siloed as for-profit, direct-to-consumer genetic testing and the application of polygenic scores to invitro fertilization services become increasingly prevalent. The multifaceted challenges facing genomics, both empirical and ethical, require collaborations that foster critical dialogue and honest debate between communities inside and outside the research enterprise. This piece argues that in order to respond to the premature or inappropriate use of genomic data in industry, the scientific community needs to first embrace, understand, and be in dialogue about its disagreements. We introduce the research framework of adversarial collaboration as a way to celebrate disagreement and productively work toward policy-informed, ethical, and anticipatory genomics research.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.xhgg.2021.100080

    View details for PubMedID 35047864

  • FoGS provides a public FAQ repository for social and behavioral genomic discoveries. Nature genetics Martschenko, D. O., Domingue, B. W., Matthews, L. J., Trejo, S. 2021; 53 (9): 1272-1274

    View details for DOI 10.1038/s41588-021-00929-5

    View details for PubMedID 34493865

  • Ethics of genomic research on occupational status. Nature human behaviour Martschenko, D. O. 2024

    View details for DOI 10.1038/s41562-024-02082-5

    View details for PubMedID 39715876

    View details for PubMedCentralID 10433733

  • Incorporating multiracial and multiethnic experiences into genetic counseling practice and research: A necessary opportunity. Journal of genetic counseling Lowe, C., Gomez-Stafford, J., Martschenko, D. O. 2024

    Abstract

    The conflation of race and genetic ancestry can have harmful consequences. Biological conceptualizations of race have long been used to justify inequities and distract from social structures that afford opportunities to some that are unjustly denied to others. Despite recent efforts within the scientific community to distinguish between the sociopolitical constructs of race and ethnicity and the biological constructs of genetic ancestry and genetic similarity, their conflation continues to influence genomic research and its translation into clinical care. One overlooked aspect of this problematic conflation is the extent to which discrete monoracial and monoethnic categorization systems persist and perpetuate unequal benefit-sharing in the clinical translation of genomic technologies. In genetic service delivery, reliance on discrete racial and ethnic categories undermines the clinical translation of genomic technologies for large segments of the global population. For multiracial and multiethnic individuals, who have complex identities that defy discrete categorization systems, the potential benefits of genomic discoveries are especially elusive. Scholars have recently begun to call for the inclusion of multiracial, multiethnic, and admixed individuals in race, ethnicity, and ancestry frameworks in genetics and genomics. However, little work has been done to explore and address the unique challenges and opportunities posed by multiracial/multiethnic individuals in genetic counseling specifically. We discuss how conceptualizing diversity along discrete racial and ethnic lines perpetuates inequitable patient care and limits efforts to increase inclusion and belonging within genetic counseling. Moreover, we argue that ongoing efforts to mitigate racial inequity must actively challenge the paradigm of monoracial and monoethnic categories to accomplish their goal.

    View details for DOI 10.1002/jgc4.1976

    View details for PubMedID 39375470

  • The methodological and ethical concerns of genetic studies of same-sex sexual behavior. American journal of human genetics Ventresca, C., Martschenko, D. O., Wedow, R., Civelek, M., Tabery, J., Carlson, J., Parker, S. C., Ramos, P. S. 2024

    Abstract

    Same-sex sexual behavior has long interested genetics researchers in part because, while there is evidence of heritability, the trait as typically defined is associated with fewer offspring. Investigations of this phenomenon began in the 1990s with linkage studies and continue today with the advent of genome-wide association studies. As this body of research grows, so does critical scientific and ethical review of it. Here, we provide a targeted overview of existing genetics studies on same-sex sexual behavior, highlight the ethical and scientific considerations of this nascent field, and provide recommendations developed by the authors to enhance social and ethical responsibility.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.08.007

    View details for PubMedID 39255798

  • Schoolhouse risk: Can we mitigate the polygenic Pygmalion effect? Acta psychologica Matthews, L. J., Zhang, Z., Martschenko, D. O. 2024; 248: 104403

    Abstract

    BACKGROUND: Although limited in predictive accuracy, polygenic scores (PGS) for educational outcomes are currently available to the public via direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies. Further, there is a growing movement to apply PGS in educational settings via 'precision education.' Prior scholarship highlights the potentially negative impacts of such applications, as disappointing results may give rise a "polygenic Pygmalion effect." In this paper two studies were conducted to identify factors that may mitigate or exacerbate negative impacts of PGS.METHODS: Two studies were conducted. In each, 1188 students were randomized to one of four conditions: Low-percentile polygenic score for educational attainment (EA-PGS), Low EA-PGS+Mitigating information, Low EA-PGS+Exacerbating information, or Control. Regression analyses were used to examine differences between conditions.RESULTS: In Study 1, participants randomized to Control reported significantly higher on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), Competence Scale (CS), Academic Efficacy Scale (AES) and Educational Potential Scale (EPS). CS was significantly higher in the Low EA-PGS+Mitigating information condition. CS and AES were significantly lower in the Low EA-PGS+Exacerbating information condition compared to the Low EA-PGS+Mitigating information condition. In Study 2, participants randomized to Control reported significantly higher CS and AES. Pairwise comparisons did not show significant differences in CS and AES. Follow-up pairwise comparisons using Tukey P-value correction did not find significant associations between non-control conditions.CONCLUSION: These studies replicated the polygenic Pygmalion effect yet were insufficiently powered to detect significant effects of mitigating contextual information. Regardless of contextual information, disappointing EA-PGS results were significantly associated with lower assessments of self-esteem, competence, academic efficacy, and educational potential.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104403

    View details for PubMedID 39003994

  • "Ethical Responsibility Very Often Gets Drowned Out": A Qualitative Interview Study of Genome Scientists' and ELSI Scholars' Perspectives on the Role and Relevance of ELSI Expertise. AJOB empirical bioethics Martschenko, D. O., Grannuci, A., Cho, M. K. 2024: 1-12

    Abstract

    Genome scientists and Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of genetics (ELSI) scholars commonly inhabit distinct research cultures - utilizing different research methods, asking different research questions, and valuing different types of knowledge. Collaborations between these two communities are frequently called for to enhance the ethical conduct of genomics research. Yet, little has been done to qualitatively compare genome scientists' and ELSI scholars' perspectives on collaborations with each other and the factors that may affect these collaborations.20 semi-structured interviews with US-based genome scientists and ELSI scholars were conducted between June-September 2021. Interviews were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.Genome scientists and ELSI scholars provided different understandings of the value and goals of their collaborations with each other. Genome scientists largely perceived ELSI expertise to be relevant for human subjects research; they described ELSI scholars as communicators who help the public and/or study participants better understand genomics research. In comparison, ELSI scholars viewed themselves as developing and implementing policies; they expressed frustration at how scientists can misunderstand their research methods or negatively perceive them. A combination of factors - both structural (e.g., criteria for promotion) and cultural (e.g., perceptions of what colleagues value and respect) - seemed to shape these diverging perspectives.Academic institutions, funders, and researchers commonly call for collaborations between genome scientists and ELSI scholars, but under-consider how their different conceptual frameworks, research methods, goals, norms, and values, conjoin to affect such partnerships. Acknowledging, exploring, and addressing the complex interplay between these factors could help to more effectively facilitate collaborations between genome scientists and ELSI scholars.

    View details for DOI 10.1080/23294515.2024.2370769

    View details for PubMedID 38916600

  • Barriers to diverse clinical trial participation in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: Engaging Hispanic/Latina caregivers and health professionals. Orphanet journal of rare diseases Crossnohere, N. L., Campoamor, N. B., Camino, E., Dresnick, E., Martschenko, D. O., Rodrigues, V., Apkon, S., Hazlett, A., Mittur, D., Rodriguez, P. E., Bridges, J. F., Armstrong, N. 2024; 19 (1): 207

    Abstract

    BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing availability of clinical trials in Duchenne muscular dystrophy, racial/ethnic minorities and other populations facing health disparities remain underrepresented in clinical trials evaluating products for Duchenne. We sought to understand the barriers faced by Hispanic/Latino families specifically and underrepresented groups more generally to clinical trial participation in Duchenne.METHODS: We engaged two participant groups: Hispanic/Latino caregivers of children with Duchenne in the US, including Puerto Rico, and health professionals within the broader US Duchenne community. Caregiver interviews explored attitudes towards and experiences with clinical trials, while professional interviews explored barriers to clinical trial participation among socio-demographically underrepresented families (e.g., low income, rural, racial/ethnic minority, etc.). Interviews were analyzed aggregately and using a thematic analysis approach. An advisory group was engaged throughout the course of the study to inform design, conduct, and interpretation of findings generated from interviews.RESULTS: Thirty interviews were conducted, including with 12 Hispanic/Latina caregivers and 18 professionals. We identified barriers to clinical trial participation at various stages of the enrollment process. In the initial identification of patients, barriers included lack of awareness about trials and clinical trial locations at clinics that were less likely to serve diverse patients. In the prescreening process, barriers included ineligibility, anticipated non-compliance in clinical trial protocols, and language discrimination. In screening, barriers included concerns about characteristics of the trial, as well as mistrust/lack of trust. In consent and recruitment, barriers included lack of timely decision support, logistical factors (distance, time, money), and lack of translated study materials.CONCLUSIONS: Numerous barriers hinder participation in Duchenne clinical trials for Hispanic/Latino families and other populations experiencing health disparities. Addressing these barriers necessitates interventions across multiple stages of the clinical trial enrollment process. Recommendations to enhance participation opportunities include developing clinical trial decision support tools, translating prominent clinical trials educational resources such as ClinicalTrials.gov, fostering trusting family-provider relationships, engaging families in clinical trial design, and establishing ethical guidelines for pre-screening potentially non-compliant patients.

    View details for DOI 10.1186/s13023-024-03209-7

    View details for PubMedID 38773664

  • Practical Approaches to Enhancing Fairness, Social Responsibility and the Inclusion of Diverse Viewpoints in Biomedicine. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing Martschenko, D. O., Martinez-Martin, N., Halley, M. 2024; 29: 645-649

    Abstract

    The following sections are included:Workshop DescriptionLearning ObjectivesPresenter InformationAbout the Workshop OrganizersPresentationsSpeaker Presentations.

    View details for PubMedID 38160313

  • Placing Publics in Public Health Genomics. Public health genomics Fox, B. M., Martschenko, D. O. 2024; 27 (1): 23-29

    View details for DOI 10.1159/000535942

    View details for PubMedID 38128495

  • Are we nearly there yet? Starts and stops on the road to use of polygenic scores. Journal of community genetics Moorthie, S., Martschenko, D. O., Fatumo, S. 2023

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s12687-023-00672-w

    View details for PubMedID 37759103

    View details for PubMedCentralID 7614889

  • Social and Behavioral Genomics: What Does It Mean for Pediatrics? The Journal of pediatrics Martschenko, D. O., Matthews, L. J., Sabatello, M. 2023: 113735

    Abstract

    Social and behavioral genomics is an emerging field that investigates whether and how molecular genetic differences between individuals relate to differences in behavioral and social outcomes such as cognitive ability, income, sexual orientation, and years of schooling. The field is the subject of ongoing academic debate and controversy. While increased attention has been devoted to considering the downstream social and ethical implications of social and behavioral genomics, limited attention has thus far been devoted to examining the specific implications of social and behavioral genomics for pediatric populations. We provide a brief overview of current and future applications of social and behavioral data to pediatric populations and discuss a variety of social and ethical issues arising from these applications. We argue that in order to minimize appropriately the risks and promote the benefits of social and behavioral genomics, a dialogue among clinicians, researchers, caregivers, and pediatric populations is needed.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.113735

    View details for PubMedID 37722558

  • Promoting diagnostic equity: specifying genetic similarity rather than race or ethnicity. Journal of medical ethics Saylor, K. W., Martschenko, D. O. 2023

    View details for DOI 10.1136/jme-2023-109449

    View details for PubMedID 37714695

  • Beware of the phony horserace between genes and environments. The Behavioral and brain sciences Trejo, S., Martschenko, D. O. 2023; 46: e228

    Abstract

    Although Burt provides a valuable critique of the scientific value of integrating genetic data into social science research, she reinforces rather than disrupts the age-old horserace between genetic effects and environmental effects. We must move past this false dichotomy to create a new ontology that recognizes the ways in which genetic and environmental processes are inextricably intertwined.

    View details for DOI 10.1017/S0140525X22002485

    View details for PubMedID 37695009

  • Wrestling with Social and Behavioral Genomics: Risks, Potential Benefits, and Ethical Responsibility. The Hastings Center report Meyer, M. N., Appelbaum, P. S., Benjamin, D. J., Callier, S. L., Comfort, N., Conley, D., Freese, J., Garrison, N. A., Hammonds, E. M., Harden, K. P., Lee, S. S., Martin, A. R., Martschenko, D. O., Neale, B. M., Palmer, R. H., Tabery, J., Turkheimer, E., Turley, P., Parens, E. 2023; 53 Suppl 1: S2-S49

    Abstract

    In this consensus report by a diverse group of academics who conduct and/or are concerned about social and behavioral genomics (SBG) research, the authors recount the often-ugly history of scientific attempts to understand the genetic contributions to human behaviors and social outcomes. They then describe what the current science-including genomewide association studies and polygenic indexes-can and cannot tell us, as well as its risks and potential benefits. They conclude with a discussion of responsible behavior in the context of SBG research. SBG research that compares individuals within a group according to a "sensitive" phenotype requires extra attention to responsible conduct and to responsible communication about the research and its findings. SBG research (1) on sensitive phenotypes that (2) compares two or more groups defined by (a) race, (b) ethnicity, or (c) genetic ancestry (where genetic ancestry could easily be misunderstood as race or ethnicity) requires a compelling justification to be conducted, funded, or published. All authors agree that this justification at least requires a convincing argument that a study's design could yield scientifically valid results; some authors would additionally require the study to have a socially favorable risk-benefit profile.

    View details for DOI 10.1002/hast.1477

    View details for PubMedID 37078667

  • Confronting ethical and social issues related to the genetics of musicality ANNALS OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Gordon, R. L., Martschenko, D. O., Nayak, S., Niarchou, M., Morrison, M. D., Bell, E., Jacoby, N., Davis, L. K. 2023; 1522 (1): 5-14

    Abstract

    New interdisciplinary research into genetic influences on musicality raises a number of ethical and social issues for future avenues of research and public engagement. The historical intersection of music cognition and eugenics heightens the need to vigilantly weigh the potential risks and benefits of these studies and the use of their outcomes. Here, we bring together diverse disciplinary expertise (complex trait genetics, music cognition, musicology, bioethics, developmental psychology, and neuroscience) to interpret and guide the ethical use of findings from recent and future studies. We discuss a framework for incorporating principles of ethically and socially responsible conduct of musicality genetics research into each stage of the research lifecycle: study design, study implementation, potential applications, and communication.

    View details for DOI 10.1111/nyas.14972

    View details for Web of Science ID 000940948700001

    View details for PubMedID 36851882

  • Re-envisioning community genetics: community empowerment in preventive genomics. Journal of community genetics Wand, H., Martschenko, D. O., Smitherman, A., Michelson, S., Pun, T., Witte, J. S., Scott, S. A., Cho, M. K., Ashley, E. A., Preventive Genomics Program Co-Design Working Group, Goldberg, E., Knepper, L., Michelson, S., Osborne, J., Sanders, V. 2023

    Abstract

    As genomic technologies rapidly develop, polygenic scores (PGS) are entering into a growing conversation on how to improve precision in public health and prevent chronic disease. While the integration of PGS into public health and clinical services raises potential benefits, it also introduces potential harms. In particular, there is a high level of uncertainty about how to incorporate PGS into clinical settings in a manner that is equitable, just, and aligned with the long-term goals of many healthcare systems to support person-centered and value-based care. This paper argues that any conversation about whether and how to design and implement PGS clinical services requires dynamic engagement with local communities, patients, and families. These parties often face the consequences, both positive and negative, of such uncertainties and should therefore drive clinical translation. As a collaborative effort between hospital stakeholders, community partners, and researchers, this paper describes a community-empowered co-design process for addressing uncertainty and making programmatic decisions about the implementation of PGS into clinical services. We provide a framework for others interested in designing clinical programs that are responsive to, and inclusive and respectful of, local communities.

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s12687-023-00638-y

    View details for PubMedID 36765027

  • Black Bioethics in the Age of Black Lives Matter JOURNAL OF MEDICAL HUMANITIES Ray, K., Fletcher, F. E., Martschenko, D. O., James, J. E. 2023: 1-17

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s10912-023-09783-4

    View details for Web of Science ID 000929208100001

    View details for PubMedID 36752936

    View details for PubMedCentralID PMC9905759

  • Social and Behavioural Genomics and the Ethics of (In)Visibility GENETIC SCIENCE AND NEW DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES Martschenko, D., Sikka, T. 2023: 9-27

    View details for Web of Science ID 001153992900002

  • Rethinking the "Public" and Rethinking "Engagement". The American journal of bioethics : AJOB Fox, B., Martschenko, D. O. 2023; 23 (7): 66-68

    View details for DOI 10.1080/15265161.2023.2207517

    View details for PubMedID 37339316

  • Precision Medicine Needs to Think Outside the Box. Frontiers in genetics Martschenko, D. O., Young, J. L. 2022; 13: 795992

    Abstract

    Precision medicine offers a precious opportunity to change clinical practice and disrupt medicine's reliance on crude racial, ethnic, or ancestral categories by focusing on an individual's unique genetic, environmental, and lifestyle characteristics. However, precision medicine and the genomic studies that are its cornerstone have thus far failed to account for human diversity. This failure is made clearer when looking at individuals who encapsulate a mosaic of different genetic ancestries and do not fit neatly into existing population labels. This piece argues that precision medicine continues to rely on the same forms of crude categorization it seeks to unsettle. Until the scientific community creates inclusive solutions for individuals who fall outside or between our existing population labels, precision medicine will continue to fall short in its aims.

    View details for DOI 10.3389/fgene.2022.795992

    View details for PubMedID 35559033

  • The Genetic Lottery: Why DNA Matters for Social Equality (Book Review) HASTINGS CENTER REPORT Book Review Authored by: Martschenko, D. 2021; 51 (6): 54-55

    Abstract

    Genes have long been used to validate social inequality. The Genetic Lottery: Why DNA Matters for Social Equality, by Kathryn Paige Harden, attempts not only to reclaim genetic research on human behavior from its eugenic past but also to argue that genetic research can be used to understand and enhance social equality. This review essay illustrates why embracing a political agenda in which genetics matter for social equality will not in practice advance efforts to reduce social inequality. It argues that the points raised in The Genetic Lottery would be important in an alternate world in which structural inequalities have ceased to exist, but not in the world we live in today.

    View details for DOI 10.1002/hast.1307

    View details for Web of Science ID 000730395000014

    View details for PubMedID 34904740

    View details for PubMedCentralID PMC9210985

  • Normalizing race in (gifted) education: genomics and spaces of White exceptionalism CRITICAL STUDIES IN EDUCATION Martschenko, D. 2023; 64 (1): 67-83

    View details for DOI 10.1080/17508487.2021.1978517

    View details for Web of Science ID 000705409900001

  • "The elephant in the room": social responsibility in the production of sociogenomics research BIOSOCIETIES Martschenko, D. 2022; 17 (4): 713-731

    Abstract

    Sociogenomics examines the extent to which genetic differences between individuals relate to differences in social and economic behaviors and outcomes. The field evokes mixed reactions. For some, sociogenomics runs the risk of normalizing eugenic attitudes and legitimizing social inequalities. For others, sociogenomics brings the promise of more robust and nuanced understandings of human behavior. Regardless, a history of misuse and misapplication of genetics raises important questions about researchers' social responsibilities. This paper draws on semi-structured interviews with sociogenomics researchers who investigate intelligence and educational attainment. It does so to understand how researcher's motivations for engaging in a historically burdened field connect to their views on social responsibility and the challenges that come with it. In interviews, researchers highlighted the trade-off between engaging in socially contested research and the potential benefits their work poses to the social sciences and clinical research. They also highlighted the dilemmas of engaging with the public, including the existence of multiple publics. Finally, researchers elucidated uncertainties over what social responsibility is in practice and whether protecting against the misuse and misinterpretation of their research is wholly possible. This paper concludes by offering ways to address some of the challenges of social responsibility in the production of knowledge.

    View details for DOI 10.1057/s41292-021-00239-3

    View details for Web of Science ID 000669268700002

    View details for PubMedID 36532361

    View details for PubMedCentralID PMC9754080

  • What about Ethics in Design Bioethics? AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS Martschenko, D., Martinez-Martin, N. 2021; 21 (6): 61-63

    View details for DOI 10.1080/15265161.2021.1915415

    View details for Web of Science ID 000654731300015

    View details for PubMedID 34036888

    View details for PubMedCentralID PMC8281611

  • Genes do not operate in a vacuum, and neither should our research NATURE GENETICS Martschenko, D., Smith, M. 2021; 53 (3): 255–56

    View details for DOI 10.1038/s41588-021-00802-5

    View details for Web of Science ID 000626724200001

    View details for PubMedID 33686261

  • Embodying biopolitically discriminate borders: teachers' spatializations of race DISCOURSE-STUDIES IN THE CULTURAL POLITICS OF EDUCATION Martschenko, D. 2022; 43 (1): 101-114

    Abstract

    Borders are constructs that shape our understandings of our societies, communities, and the world. Geospatial borders draw distinctions between neighborhoods and schools that are deemed 'worthy' and 'unworthy' of economic, social, and political investment. This paper employs the theoretical framework of 'discriminate biopower' to argue that geospatial borders produce a 'socio-political invisibility' linked to race and racial inequality. Through focus group discussions with kindergarten - grade eight educators in the Chicago metropolitan area of the United States, this paper provides evidence of how understandings of race are spatially applied by teachers. Findings suggest that teachers located and conflated individuals and racial groups with physical locations, demonstrating how spatial borders and the practice of bordering function as a biopolitical and segregationist way to understand race and power.

    View details for DOI 10.1080/01596306.2020.1813089

    View details for Web of Science ID 000568759200001

    View details for PubMedID 35692447

    View details for PubMedCentralID PMC9181023

  • "The train has left the station": The arrival of the biosocial sciences in education RESEARCH IN EDUCATION Martschenko, D. 2020; 107 (1): 3–9

    View details for DOI 10.1177/0034523720914636

    View details for Web of Science ID 000523117700001

  • DNA Dreams': Teacher Perspectives on the Role and Relevance of Genetics for Education RESEARCH IN EDUCATION Martschenko, D. 2020; 107 (1): 33–54

    View details for DOI 10.1177/0034523719869956

    View details for Web of Science ID 000482706500001

  • Genetics and Education: Recent Developments in the Context of an Ugly History and an Uncertain Future AERA OPEN Martschenko, D., Trejo, S., Domingue, B. W. 2019; 5 (1)

    View details for DOI 10.1177/2332858418810516

    View details for Web of Science ID 000509665500001

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9046-5893