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 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources
PubMed2006

Chance, choice and control: lay debate on prenatal social sex selection.

Assisted reproductive technologies are typically positioned as increasing the range of choices open to the healthcare consumer, thereby enhancing 'reproductive freedom'. In this paper, we question the equivalence of reproductive choice and personal freedom in ethical theory, using results from a project investigating how lay people make ethical evaluations about the new genetic and reproductive technologies. We took the topic of social sex selection by preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), and used group discussions and interviews in the north-east of England to trace how lay people develop and express their ethical evaluations, and to identify the implicit or explicit normative framework that gave rise to their opinions on prenatal sex selection. There was a striking level of ambivalence towards choice in general and reproductive choice in particular. Participants offered few positive statements and numerous reasons why reproductive choice might be problematic. Our participants' argumentation shares with mainstream bioethical analysis the weighing of the possible harms of prenatal sex selection for social reasons against the harm of restricting reproductive freedom. However, unlike most secular-liberal bioethicists, many of our participants concluded that prenatal sex selection is undesirable because it is an expression of parental preference instead of a response to the future child's need. Our interpretation of their reasoning is that they work from an ideal of "good parents", one of the features of which is the relinquishing of control over their children, except to protect them from harm. This voluntary self-limitation does not indicate reduced autonomy, because parental autonomy can only operate within the limits set by this relational framework. We suggest that a model of relational autonomy captures our lay participants' framing of the problem better than a more traditional understanding of autonomy. Our study also shows that in appropriately structured discussion of bioethical issues, lay people can articulate reasons for their opinions that are grounded in sophisticated and morally relevant concepts.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Psychiatry and bioethics. An exploration of the relationship.

Psychiatrists have been extensively involved in ethics in the general hospital over the past two decades and have functioned in that area in a variety of roles. The basis for psychiatry's strong interest in bioethics can be understood as related to three factors: familiarity with many of the clinical problems that lead to bioethics consultation, the frequent importance of psychiatric aspects of ethics, and the observation that psychiatrists already possess many of the clinical skills necessary for doing ethics work. The particular value of training psychiatrists to serve as ethics consultants, in addition to the importance of their continuing role on hospital ethics committees, is discussed.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMedDate not supplied

International policy failures: cloning and stem-cell research.

In late 2003, two international bodies were unable to resolve disagreements that involved bioethical issues. First, the United Nations General Assembly failed to pass a treaty on reproductive cloning because of insistence by some countries that the treaty include a ban on cloning for research. In view of the importance of enacting prohibition of reproductive cloning, the two issues should be separated and each argued on its own merits. Relevant objections to separation of the two issues can be refuted. Second, the European Union (EU) failed to agree on conditions for funding stem-cell research because of the diversity of views and policies of the countries of the EU. Because a stalemate was reached, funding decisions in the next programme cycle will be made on an ad hoc basis. Scientists will not have information they need to plan research programmes, suggesting that clear guidelines, even if restrictive, are preferable to vague unpublicised criteria.

Cloning, Organism↗
PubMed1995

Bioethics in Italy.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Abortion, Induced↗