Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Warnock Committee”

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 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMed1984

A welcome report.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1991

Surrogacy.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1988

Two ethical approaches to research on human beings.

Since World War II the Catholic Church and national and international study groups have issued separate sets of statements regarding the ethics of research involving human subjects. The Church and the study groups agree on several points, including the following: Research on human subjects is a vital part of scientific medicine. Ethical research requires the informed consent of the subject or proxy. Research on human subjects is therapeutic or nontherapeutic. The risk of harm involved in research must be considered in regard to the potential benefit. Research on human beings should be allowed only after appropriate research on animals. Researchers should practice equity in selecting subjects and scientific problems to be studied. The human subject or proxy should be free to withdraw from the research program at any time. The two sets of statements generally disagree about nontherapeutic research on embryos and about genetic research. They also disagree on the use of in vitro fertilization and embryo transplants to initiate pregnancy. The disagreements are due to dissimilar ethical systems. The Church bases ethical analysis on a study of the effect an action has on basic human goods. As a result of this analysis, the Church maintains that some human actions are good or evil in themselves. If the action is evil insofar as the natural needs and functions of a person are concerned, it is not ethically good simply because it results in a good outcome.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1990

Philosophical integrity and policy development in bioethics.

Critically examining what most people take for granted is central to philosophical inquiry. Philosophers who accept positions on policy making commissions, tasks forces, or committees cannot, however, play the same uncompromisingly critical role in this capacity as they do in the classroom or in their personal research or writing. Still, philosophers have much to contribute to such bodies, and they can do so without compromising their integrity or betraying themselves as philosophers.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed2005

Human reproductive technologies and the law: a select committee report.

The House of Commons Science & Technology Committee has reviewed the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act. It considered a) the balance between legislation, regulation and reproductive freedom; b) the role of Parliament in human reproductive technologies; and c) the foundation, adequacy and appropriateness of the ethical framework for legislation. It also considered the Act itself and the workings of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Its report is written from a very liberal perspective, but is a very thorough overview of current issues and debate in the field. There follow, slightly abridged, the conclusions and recommendations of the 200-page report.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1990

The philosopher as insider and outsider.

Philosophers may play the role of insider, e.g., serving as advisor to government commissions, or of outsider, commenting on the work of such commissions. Each role may raise dilemmas. It is argued that as insider the philosopher's primary duties should be to clarify and inform, as well as philosophize with the commissioners, and help them stay on a course in which moral considerations are given their proper weight. Fulfilling these duties means that the philosopher will sometimes have to help produce a weaker intellectual document than he would prefer, or lose a chance to directly promote the public good. The insider philosopher will also have to consider whether it is appropriate for a policy proposal from a commission to differ from much current government policy, and how morally appropriate compromise can be reached among commissioners. Given his understanding of how an insider philosopher should function and how commission reports are constructed, the outsider philosopher can comment both on how close a report comes to being perfect of its type, and how far short of an ideal philosophical analysis even a perfect government report is. It may be appropriate for him to give greater weight to the public good, if his comments are very likely to affect it, than the insider philosopher. Examples for discussion are drawn from government reports on organ transplantation, embryo research, terminating care, and compensation for research subjects.

Advisory Committees↗