Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Bioethics”

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 235 records · Page 13Linked to original sources
PubMed1997

Research in bioethics: a bridge between science and philosophy.

The author makes an inquiry into the diverse attitudes that the culture of Western man has assumed towards the concepts of truth and morality. Analysing five different attitudes in the consideration of relationships between "good" and "truth", he concludes that a concrete definition of truth and morality can only be sought after but never reached. Similarly, a concrete definition for bioethics can only be attempted, more questions than answers arise. Bioethics needs to define its principles to achieve its foundation. Yet bioethics, being a bridge between science and philosophy, has not succeeded in finding unequivocal principles, but it has only succeeded in posing questions. Bioethics is thus a despairing but also unavoidable venture.

Bioethics↗
PubMed1998

[Bioethics: history and problems].

This paper aims at describing the circumstances of the birth of bioethics. In the first section, the paper stresses some historical data supporting the widely diffused opinion according to which bioethics arose in the USA at the beginning of the Seventies. In the second, two of the most important factors in the birth of bioethics are discussed: namely, the possibilities opened by genetic engineering and the changes in the medical enterprise and health care ethics. In the third section the paper discusses one of the most important practical realization of bioethics: the creation of ethical committees.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2006

Diversity and deliberation: bioethics commissions and moral reasoning.

This article considers the sort of diversity in perspective appropriate for a presidential commission on bioethics, and by implication, high-level governmental commissions on ethics more generally. It takes as its point of comparison the respective reports on human cloning produced by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, appointed by President Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush's President's Council on Bioethics, under the leadership of its original chair, Leon Kass. I argue that the Clinton Commission Report exemplifies forensic diversity (the type of diversity between contesting parties in a legal case), while the Kass Council Report exemplifies academic diversity (the diversity found in a medieval disputatio). Drawing upon Thomas Aquinas, I argue that the type of diversity most appropriate for such advisory bodies is deliberative diversity, which facilitates the President's process of taking counsel. After considering their respective charges, I suggest that neither the Clinton Commission nor the Kass Council possessed an adequate degree of deliberative diversity for their respective tasks.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed2005

A valuable up-to-date compendium of bioethical knowledge.

In this brief article, we examine the document entitled Universal Draft Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, published by UNESCO in June 2005. We examine it in terms of its content and its appropriate role in global bioethics movements in the future. We make clear our view on the declaration: the declaration, despite a variety of serious problems, remains a valuable bioethical document and can contribute in substantial ways to the happiness of people throughout the world.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2004

Passing on the right: conservative bioethics is closer than it appears.

Like automobiles in the passenger side mirror, conservative bioethics is closer than it appears, and it has joined forces with the neo-conservative movement's rejection of moral relativism and moral pluralism. Leon Kass and about half of the current bioethics council appointed by President Bush form an interlocking world of journals, conferences, presidential advisors and, most notably, bioethics commission staff, all working to promote and extend federal regulation of public morals in the name of preserving real and romanticized societal norms in the face of social evolution wrought by technological change.

Advisory Committees↗
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↗
PubMed1997

Bioethics: a balancing of concerns in context.

Ethics is a philosophical approach which is increasingly being used to identify acceptable behaviour in a health context. Bioethics has emerged as a term for ethics in health and medical contexts. Bioethics is about the application of reasoning to a health context. It relies on the people in each context to reflect on ethics concerns, and to make acceptable decisions on how to behave. This paper canvasses current concerns in bioethics, and demonstrates the essential features of context, and players in the context, in ethical discussion.

Altruism↗
PubMed2005

Sin and bioethics: why a liturgical anthropology is foundational.

The project of articulating a coherent, canonical, content-full, secular morality-cum-bioethics fails, because it does not acknowledge sin, which is to say, it does not acknowledge the centrality of holiness, which is essential to a non-distorted understanding of human existence and of morality. Secular morality cannot establish a particular moral content, the harmony of the good and the right, or the necessary precedence of morality over prudence, because such is possible only in terms of an ultimate point of reference: God. The necessity of a rightly ordered appreciation of God places centrally the focus on holiness and the avoidance of sin. Because the cardinal relationship of creatures to their Creator is worship, and because the cardinal corporate act of human worship is the Liturgy, morality in general and bioethics in particular can be understood in terms of the conditions necessary, so as worthily to enter into Eucharistic liturgical participation. Morality can be summed up in terms of the requirements of ritual purity. A liturgical anthropology is foundational to an account of the content-full morality and bioethics that should bind humans, since humans are first and foremost creatures obliged to join in rightly ordered worship of their Creator. When humans worship correctly, when they avoid sin and pursue holiness, they participate in restoring created reality.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed2006

James Drane's More Humane Medicine: a new foundation for twenty-first century bioethics?

James Drane's More Humane Medicine: A Liberal Catholic Bioethics is an outstanding contribution to the study of bioethics in our day. Catholics and others who are interested in the issues discussed here will benefit from this masterful treatment. The author opens with a set of definitions, starting with what he means by a "more humane medicine." Drane contends that a more humane medicine has become necessary and desired, but not because the traditional medical ethic as "a self-declared and self-imposed ethic, outlining what noble service to others entails" is no longer valid. Rather he defines it as an advance on the traditional ethic; a "new foundation" based on a "lived set of obligations derived from a felt commitment to other persons ... an ethics based on the relationship between doctors and patients and essentially an ethics of virtue." Drane's work is a "liberal Catholic Bioethics" in which he challenges his own faith tradition, the Roman Catholic Church, on such topics as sexuality, birth control, abortion, cloning, stem cell research, aging and dying, and euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. The present article is a critical essay that analyzes the author's statements and conclusions.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed2003

Brain death and the historical understanding of bioethics.

In a 1968 Report, the Ad Hoc Committee of the Harvard Medical School to Examine the Definition of Brain Death promulgated influential criteria for the idea and practice known as "brain death." Before and since the Committee met, brain death has been a focal point of visions and nightmares of medical progress, purpose, and moral authority. Critics of the Committee felt it was deaf to apparently central moral considerations and focused on the self-serving purpose of expanding transplantation. Historical characterizations of the uses and meanings of brain death and the work of the Committee have tended to echo these themes, which means also generally repeating a widely held bioethical self-understanding of how the field appeared-that is, as a necessary antidote of moral expertise. This paper looks at the Committee and finds that historical depictions of it have been skewed by such a bioethical agenda. Entertaining different possibilities as to the motives and historical circumstances behind the Report it famously produced may point to not only different histories of the Committee, but also different perspectives on the historical legacy and role of bioethics as a discourse for addressing anxieties about medicine.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed1987

Bioethics as a prescription for civic action: the Japanese interpretation.

This paper reports on recent developments in the rise of bioethics in Japan. Much of the recent interest in bioethics in Japan is seen as a response to various civic movements. The women's liberation movement, access to equal opportunity, and the recognition of patients' rights and the importance of informed consent are among some of the movements influencing the development of bioethics in Japan. The author argues that this movement is to be encouraged and fostered by health care professionals, public policy makers, as well as lay persons in Japan.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed1996

The historical setting of Latin American bioethics.

The historical stages through which Latin American society has passed are at least four: the first, dominated by a particular sort of ethic I have termed the "ethic of the gift;" then the period of conquest, in which the prevalent ethic was one of war and subjection by force, which I call the "ethic of despotism;" followed by the colonial age, in which a new ethical model of "paternalism" emerged; and finally the stage of the "ethic of autonomy," which began with the independence movements of the 18th and 19th centuries and is far from ended. Independence was won by the criollos from European domination with very little participation by the Indian population. The latter was left out of the democratic process and saw itself relegated to a worse situation than in the centuries of colonial rule, for it was no longer protected by the paternalism of the Laws of the Indies of 1542. This is the reason for the division of the Latin American society of the last century into two quite different social strata: one bourgeois, which has assimilated the liberal revolution, and enjoys a health care quite similar to that available in any other Western country and hence faces the same bioethical problems as any developed Western society; the other a very poor stratum, without any economic or social power and hence unable to exercise its civil rights, such as the rights to life and to humane treatment. In this population sector; which is numerically the larger, the major bioethical problems are those of justice and the distribution of scarce resources. The study of Latin American medical ethics can earn for these subjects, whose deplorable condition has been essentially ignored in the bioethics of the first-world countries, the importance they merit.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed1993

What has bioethics to offer the developing countries.

My paper consists of three parts. In the first part I try to explain the intellectual basis of bioethics in developing countries. In the second part I describe the bioethical dilemmas facing these countries. In the third part I shall discuss the changes that have to be made in bioethics if it is to take root in these countries, and thereby help them to improve the human existence.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed1993

Bioethics and culture: an African perspective.

The project of Bioethics seems to me to require paying attention to the cultural realities and assumptive frame of reference of different peoples. I assume that this must be one of the views of the organizers of this conference too and that this is why the idea of country reports is taken seriously. If I am right about this, then it makes sense for me to start my discussion with a very brief discussion of some aspects of the cultural realities of Africa with particular reference to the Yoruba of Nigeria. Then I will discuss how this world view raises issues for bioethics. Two aspects of people's worldview relevant to bioethical issues are their conception of the human person and their conception of cause. What they consider themselves to be, and what they consider to be the principles of causation will normally influence their attitudes to health and illness and their choices regarding health care. I will briefly discuss these issues with regard to the Yoruba worldview.

Africa↗
PubMed2004

FACE facts: why human genetics will always provoke bioethics.

Some people dispute the relative importance of issues in genetics and biotechnology for the future of bioethics, either because they think the problems are time-limited or because they give priority to issue of human rights and social justice in health care. In fact, the special historical standing of genetic issue s in bioethics reflects four overlapping sources of moral sensitivity which ar inherent in the stories that genetic science tells and raise paradigmatic justice concerns: the implications of new genetic knowledge for people's understanding of their familial roles, ancestral origins, community memberships, and ethnic affiliations. Beneath worries over "genetic privacy," "the therapeutic gap," and the "post-human," this constellation of basic wellspring which both insures and justifies a central place for genetics on the agenda of bioethics.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed1999

Bioethics regulations in Turkey.

Although modern technical and scientific developments in medicine are followed closely in Turkey, it cannot be claimed that the same is true in the field of bioethics. Yet, more and more attention is now being paid to bioethics and ethics training in health sciences. In addition, there are also legal regulations in bioethics, some of which are not so new. The objective of these regulations is to provide technical and administrative control. Ethical concerns are rather few. What attracts our attention most in these regulations is the presence of the idea of "consent".

Abortion, Legal↗
PubMed1998

The development of bioethics and the issue of euthanasia: regulating, de-regulating or re-regulating?

This paper relates the development of bioethics and the issue of euthanasia to social control. It suggests that, contrary to appearances, developments in these areas indicate increasing government control of health care practice. Specifically, it argues that, although the emergence of bioethics may appear to indicate health care professionals engaging in self-regulation, the reality is more a case of re-regulation or a shift of regulatory control from health care professionals to governments or agents of governments. By contrast, the issue of euthanasia appears to be proceeding in a different direction in that it seems to be a dispute over de-regulation of health care practice. In reality, though, it is similar to the development of bioethics. The issue of euthanasia, especially in recent years, rests on the same type of re-regulation of health care practice--a shift from medical control to increasing control by government.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed2006

Human dignity in the Nazi era: implications for contemporary bioethics.

BACKGROUND: The justification for Nazi programs involving involuntary euthanasia, forced sterilisation, eugenics and human experimentation were strongly influenced by views about human dignity. The historical development of these views should be examined today because discussions of human worth and value are integral to medical ethics and bioethics. We should learn lessons from how human dignity came to be so distorted to avoid repetition of similar distortions. DISCUSSION: Social Darwinism was foremost amongst the philosophies impacting views of human dignity in the decades leading up to Nazi power in Germany. Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory was quickly applied to human beings and social structure. The term 'survival of the fittest' was coined and seen to be applicable to humans. Belief in the inherent dignity of all humans was rejected by social Darwinists. Influential authors of the day proclaimed that an individual's worth and value were to be determined functionally and materialistically. The popularity of such views ideologically prepared German doctors and nurses to accept Nazi social policies promoting survival of only the fittest humans.A historical survey reveals five general presuppositions that strongly impacted medical ethics in the Nazi era. These same five beliefs are being promoted in different ways in contemporary bioethical discourse. Ethical controversies surrounding human embryos revolve around determinations of their moral status. Economic pressures force individuals and societies to examine whether some people's lives are no longer worth living. Human dignity is again being seen as a relative trait found in certain humans, not something inherent. These views strongly impact what is taken to be acceptable within medical ethics. SUMMARY: Five beliefs central to social Darwinism will be examined in light of their influence on current discussions in medical ethics and bioethics. Acceptance of these during the Nazi era proved destructive to many humans. Their widespread acceptance today would similarly lead to much human death and suffering. A different ethic is needed which views human dignity as inherent to all human individuals.

Animal Rights↗