This paper explores the epistemological divide between mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) and science, and considers which cultural concepts have relevance when considering the use of embryos in research. We argue that empowerment is a necessary precursor for a dialogue process to be effective and to maintain the cultural dignity and confidence of the participants. Negotiating spaces to share ideas, concepts and values between different knowledge systems is an important exercise that creates opportunities for innovative thinking. The identification of cultural cues and indigenous reference points for considering how knowledge relating to embryo research might be located within a traditional knowledge schema is a necessary type of activity to ensure mātauranga Māori maintains its usefulness for Māori in a changing society while retaining its indigenous spirit and cultural tradition.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ACART. (2006). Tikanga and potential implications of using assisted reproductive technology: ACART's current understanding. In Use of Gametes and Embryos in Human Reproductive Research: Determining Policy for New Zealand.Wellington: ACART.
2.
Ahuriri-DriscollA., BakerV., HepiM., HudsonM., MikaC., & TiakiwaiS. J. (2007). Sustainability of Rongoā Māori. (Client. Rep. FW06113). Christchurch, New Zealand: Institute of Environmental Science and Research Ltd (ESR).
3.
BattyL. P. (2002). Assisted reproductive technology: The Aotearoa/New Zealand policy context. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch.
4.
CheungM. J., GibbonsH. M., DragunowM., & FaullR. L. (2007). Tikanga in the laboratory: Engaging safe practice.Mai Review, 2007(1).
5.
CramF., PitamaL., & Phillip-BarbaraG. (2002). Māori and genetic engineering.Indigenous Research Institute.International Research Institute for Māori and Indiginous Education.
6.
DyallL. (1999). Awhina i te hangarau whakato: Tiaki te whakapapa. Assisted reproductive technologies: Protecting the generations. In ConeyS., & ElseA. (Eds.), Protecting our future: The case for greater regulation of assisted reproductive technology.Auckland: Women's Health Action Trust.
7.
EvansD., GillettG., PickeringN., & KingM. (2009). Cultural perceptions of genetic biotechnologies.University of Otago, Dunedin. Unpublished research report.
8.
GloverM., McCreeA., & DyallL. (2007). Māori attitudes to assisted human reproduction: An exploratory study. Summary report.Auckland: Social & Community Health, School of Population Health, University of Auckland.
9.
HaamiB. (1995). Māori doctor: Dr Golan Maaka.North Shore City, NZ: Tandem Press.
10.
HemaraW. (2006). Tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori & bioethics: A literature review. Report to the Bioethics Council. Mauriora ki te Ao Living Universe Ltd.
11.
HongY. Y., MorrisM., ChiuC. Y., & Benet-MartínezV. (2000). Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition.American Psychologist, 55, 709–720.
12.
JosephR., HudsonM., HemiM., & TiakiwaiSJ. (2008). Te hau mihi ata: mātauranga Māori & science-Literature review on the interface between mātauranga Māori & science.University of Waikato: Hamilton.
13.
MarsdenM. (1992). God, man and universe: A Māori view. In KingM. (Ed.), Te ao hurihuri: Aspects of Māoritanga.Auckland: Reed.
14.
Mila-SchaafK., & HudsonM. (2009). The interface between cultural understandings: Negotiating new spaces for pacific mental health.Pacific Health Dialog, 15(1), 113–119.
OkereT., NjokuC., & DevishR. (2005). All knowledge is first of all local knowledge: An introduction.Africa Development, 3, 1–19.
17.
RobertsM., & FairweatherJ. R. (2004). South Island Māori perceptions of biotechnology.Christchurch, NZ: Lincoln University, Agricultural and Economics Research Unit.
18.
SarrisG. (1993). Keeping slug woman alive: A holistic approach to American Indian texts.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
19.
SmithL. T., HudsonM., HemiM., TiakiwaiS., JosephR., BarrettA., & DunnM. (2009). The negotiated space [unpublished paper Te hau mihi ata: Mātauranga Māori, science and biotechnology].Hamilton, NZ: University of Waikato.
20.
Tamasese EfiT. T. T. (2008). Keynote address: Bio-ethics and the Samoan Indigenous reference. Mila-Schaaf, K. Workshop report. Regional Pacific ethics of knowledge production workshop. 2007 November 13-15, Tofamamao, Apia, Samoa (pp. 79–89). Wellington: UNESCO.
21.
TaupoT. (2006). Close encounter of the genetic testing kind: Negotiate the interfaces between mātauranga Māori and other knowledge systems. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch.
22.
Te MomoO. H. F. (2006). Socially and culturally sustainable biotechnology in Aotearoa/New Zealand. A report on the social, cultural and religious/spiritual dimensions of biotechnology for Māori from 2003 to 2006.Auckland: Massey University.
23.
ThagardP. (2008). Conceptual change in the history of science: Life, mind, and disease. In VosniadouS. (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 374–387). London: Routledge.
24.
TurnbullD. (2005). Comparing knowledge traditions: Working with multiplicity, sustaining criticism and avoiding ‘epistemic charity’. In: Proceeding of the Indigenous Knowledges Conference: Reconciling Academic Priorities with Indigenous Realities. June 22-25 (pp. 169–178). Wellington: Victoria University.
