Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Bioethical Issues”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Beyond medical ethics: new directions for philosophy and medicine.

A unique relationship exists between physicians and philosophers -- one that expands on the constructive potential of the liaison between physicians and, for example, theologians, on the one hand, or, social workers on the other. This liaison should focus in the scientific aspects of medicine, not just the ethical aspects. Philosophers can provide physicians with a perspective on both the philosophy and the history of medicine through the ages -- a sense of how medicine has adapted to the social, cultural, and ethical needs of each period. This perspective, while emphasizing medicine as science, should not be limited to matters of methodology, or to criteria for distinguishing science from other intellectual pursuits, but should be concerned also with the history, sociology, and politics of science. Both physicians and philosophers stand to gain from a strengthening of their active liaison now as never before; but most of all, the public will be the beneficiary.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed1994

Withdrawal of life-support: four problems in medical ethics.

... In this paper I shall consider the following four beliefs which often cluster together: A) Passive euthanasia is justifiable, but "pulling the plug" and active euthanasia are wrong; B) There is no right to health care. We have no duty to provide free riders with health care; C) Abortion is immoral because it violates the right to life of the fetus; D) Justice sometimes requires us to increase a patient's risk of death by shifting a scarce resource to someone who needs it more. For the sake of concreteness I shall attribute these beliefs along with certain, often invoked rationales to a purely imaginary person named Ron. I shall not show that the individual beliefs are right or wrong or that the individual rationales are strong or weak. Instead, I shall show that Ron cannot consistently use these four rationales to justify these four beliefs. More precisely, I shall show that beliefs (A) through (D) together with certain common, general background beliefs involve incompatible views about the withdrawal of life-support. My objective is to make the incompatibility explicit and thus to persuade people like Ron to abandon some of their beliefs.

Abortion, Induced↗
PubMed1995

Being skeptical about the medical humanities.

In this paper the author challenges the prevailing view that contemporary writing in the medical humanities is serving the needs of the various health care disciplines. The current medical humanities literature assumes that physicians are the appropriate target group. This is most notably the case within health care ethics literature. There appears to be an unexamined assumption that physician-centric approaches to clinical ethical decision-making are the standard by which appropriate ethical practice is judged. The author challenges this assumption and addresses the problems that this approach engenders. The medical humanities literature appears to reinforce hierarchical, patriarchal arrangements which are themselves not morally neutral.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed2005

Use and abuse of bioethics: integrity and professional standing.

This paper sets out to examine the integrity and professional standing of "Bioethics." It argues that professions have certain responsibilities that start with setting criteria for and credentialing those that have met the criteria and goes on to ultimately have social responsibilities to the community. As it now stands we claim that Bioethics--while it certainly has achieved some progress in the way medicine has developed--has failed to become a profession and has to a large extent failed in its social responsibility. We feel that Bioethics has to define itself, set criteria for membership in the profession, police itself and--above all--meet its social responsibility to become a profession meriting that name.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2005

Towards an GMO discipline: ethical remarks.

The present technological transformation calls for a new kind of vet: he has to accomplish his own institutional tasks bearing in mind the definition of a "good practice" code and also performing educational and informative tasks in zootechnology in order to ensure the animal well-being. Therefore, his contribution can be relevant in developing and interpreting laws related to the protection of animal welfare and further considerations on the ethical and deontological thought, concerning the technological use of animals. The vet's role is also fundamental in the following areas: further study of bioethical issues related to zootechnology and the professional growth of whoever is engaged, in different ways, in productive activities and research on animals.

Animal Welfare↗