In defence of clinical bioethics.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to T H Murray.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The identification of Acquired Immune Deficiency syndrome (AIDS) three years ago has created a crisis of confidence. Persons with AIDS and others who might be research subjects recognize that research is essential to understand, treat, and prevent this devastating disease, yet they are concerned that information divulged for research purposes might be used in ways detrimental to their interests. Unless they have confidence in the system designed to protect their privacy and in the people to whom personal information is entrusted they may provide invalid or incomplete data. The problem, then, is: What procedures and policies will both protect the privacy interests of research subjects and enable research to proceed expeditiously? Now that major research efforts are being undertaken to tackle the many puzzling aspects of AIDS, this question has become an urgent one. These guidelines, developed by a multidisciplinary group representing diverse professional, public and social interests, are designed to provide the basis for the cooperation of the research community and the subjects of AIDS research. Addressed to research institutions, individual researchers, institutional review boards and public health departments, the recommendations seek changes deemed necessary to afford the fullest degree of protection for confidentiality compatible with sound scientific research.
Deciding whether genetic differences among individuals are morally relevant to health insurance requires us to ask, What kind of good is health care? and, What principles should govern its distribution? There are good reasons to doubt that "actuarial fairness" is an adequate description of genuine fairness in health insurance.
Doctors often accept gifts from drug companies. We analyze this practice and conclude that accepting a gift has complex practical and ethical repercussions. Gifts cost patients money, and they may change society's perception of the profession as serving the best interest of patients. Also, accepting a gift establishes a relationship between the physician and the drug company that obliges a response from the physician. Accepting gifts and the resulting relationship have ethical implications as well. First, the use of patients' money to pay for gifts can be unjust. Second, the fiduciary relationship between physician and patient may be threatened if prescribing practices are affected (as intended by the drug company). Third, physicians' characters may be altered by a practice that fosters self-interest at patients' expense. We discuss the need for guidelines for the profession to help physicians promote their patients' well-being.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
As science learns more about how the brain works, and fails to work, the possibility for developing "cognition enhancers" becomes more plausible. And the demand for drugs that can help us think faster, remember more, and focus more keenly has already been demonstrated by the market success of drugs like Ritalin, which tames the attention span, and Prozac, which ups the competitive edge. The new drug Aricept, which improves memory, most likely will join them. Whether such drugs are good for individuals, or for society, is an open question, one that demands far more public discussion.