Stephen Wilkinson
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- May 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199273966
- eISBN:
- 9780191706585
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199273966.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, Political Philosophy
To what extent should parents be allowed to use selection technologies (such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis) to determine the characteristics of their children? And is there something morally ...
More
To what extent should parents be allowed to use selection technologies (such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis) to determine the characteristics of their children? And is there something morally wrong with parents who wish to do this? Choosing Tomorrow's Children provides answers to these questions. In particular, the book applies the techniques of philosophical bioethics to address issues raised by selective reproduction, the practice of choosing between different possible future persons by selecting or deselecting (for example) embryos, eggs, and sperm. It offers answers to questions including the following. Do children have a ‘right to an open future’ and, if they do, what moral constraints does this place upon selective reproduction? Under what circumstances (if any) should sex selection be allowed? Should we ‘screen out’ as much disease and disability as possible before birth, or would that be an objectionable form of eugenics? Is it acceptable to create or select a future person (a ‘saviour sibling’) in order to provide life-saving tissue for an existing relative? Is there a moral difference between selecting to avoid disease and selecting to produce an ‘enhanced’ child? And should we allow deaf parents to use reproductive technologies to ensure that they have a deaf child? The book does not provide one overarching conclusion but rather assesses each argument-type on its merits. Insofar as it is possible to generalise though, Choosing Tomorrow's Children concludes that most of the arguments usually provided against selective reproduction are flawed in one way or another.Less
To what extent should parents be allowed to use selection technologies (such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis) to determine the characteristics of their children? And is there something morally wrong with parents who wish to do this? Choosing Tomorrow's Children provides answers to these questions. In particular, the book applies the techniques of philosophical bioethics to address issues raised by selective reproduction, the practice of choosing between different possible future persons by selecting or deselecting (for example) embryos, eggs, and sperm. It offers answers to questions including the following. Do children have a ‘right to an open future’ and, if they do, what moral constraints does this place upon selective reproduction? Under what circumstances (if any) should sex selection be allowed? Should we ‘screen out’ as much disease and disability as possible before birth, or would that be an objectionable form of eugenics? Is it acceptable to create or select a future person (a ‘saviour sibling’) in order to provide life-saving tissue for an existing relative? Is there a moral difference between selecting to avoid disease and selecting to produce an ‘enhanced’ child? And should we allow deaf parents to use reproductive technologies to ensure that they have a deaf child? The book does not provide one overarching conclusion but rather assesses each argument-type on its merits. Insofar as it is possible to generalise though, Choosing Tomorrow's Children concludes that most of the arguments usually provided against selective reproduction are flawed in one way or another.
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780195161243
- eISBN:
- 9780199950317
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195161243.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, General, Moral Philosophy
Over the last several decades, advocates have championed a bewildering variety of methods for understanding and resolving difficult ethical problems in medicine, including principlism, wide ...
More
Over the last several decades, advocates have championed a bewildering variety of methods for understanding and resolving difficult ethical problems in medicine, including principlism, wide reflective equilibrium, casuistry, feminism, virtue theory, narrative, and others. Much of this advocacy overlooks the limits of the favored method, and neglects the strengths found in the alternatives. In systematically uncovering and evaluating both the strengths and limits of a variety of ethical tools, Methods in Medical Ethics: Critical Perspectives develops a comprehensive appreciation of the roles that various methods can each play in deepening our understanding of ethical problems in medicine, and in supporting well-grounded judgments about what to do. Each method discussed is critically evaluated to identify both limits and advantages, which are then illustrated through discussion of specific cases or controversies. This review not only demonstrates that there is no single method adequate to the task. More importantly, it develops an informed eclecticism that knows how to pick the right tool for the right job.Less
Over the last several decades, advocates have championed a bewildering variety of methods for understanding and resolving difficult ethical problems in medicine, including principlism, wide reflective equilibrium, casuistry, feminism, virtue theory, narrative, and others. Much of this advocacy overlooks the limits of the favored method, and neglects the strengths found in the alternatives. In systematically uncovering and evaluating both the strengths and limits of a variety of ethical tools, Methods in Medical Ethics: Critical Perspectives develops a comprehensive appreciation of the roles that various methods can each play in deepening our understanding of ethical problems in medicine, and in supporting well-grounded judgments about what to do. Each method discussed is critically evaluated to identify both limits and advantages, which are then illustrated through discussion of specific cases or controversies. This review not only demonstrates that there is no single method adequate to the task. More importantly, it develops an informed eclecticism that knows how to pick the right tool for the right job.
John H. Evans
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199860852
- eISBN:
- 9780199932474
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199860852.003.0007
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, General
This chapter summarizes the response to the crisis by mainstream bioethicists, and then summarize my argument for the proper response to the crisis. In general, the bioethics profession needs to pay ...
More
This chapter summarizes the response to the crisis by mainstream bioethicists, and then summarize my argument for the proper response to the crisis. In general, the bioethics profession needs to pay more attention to the jurisdictions it is competing for and the characteristics of those who give jurisdiction in each of these task-spaces.Less
This chapter summarizes the response to the crisis by mainstream bioethicists, and then summarize my argument for the proper response to the crisis. In general, the bioethics profession needs to pay more attention to the jurisdictions it is competing for and the characteristics of those who give jurisdiction in each of these task-spaces.
John H. Evans
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199860852
- eISBN:
- 9780199932474
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199860852.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, General
Seemingly every day society faces a new ethical challenge raised by a scientific innovation. Human genetic engineering, stem cell research, face transplantation, synthetic biology – all were science ...
More
Seemingly every day society faces a new ethical challenge raised by a scientific innovation. Human genetic engineering, stem cell research, face transplantation, synthetic biology – all were science fiction only a few decades ago, but are now all are reality. How do we as a society decide whether these technologies are ethical? For decades professional bioethicists have served as a mediator between a busy public and decision-makers, helping people understand their own ethical concerns, framing arguments, discrediting illogical claims and lifting up promising ones. These bioethicists operate in multiple venues such as hospital decision-making, institutions that conduct research on humans, and recommending ethical policy to the government. While functioning quite well for many years, the bioethics profession is in crisis. Policy-makers are less inclined to take the advice of bioethics professionals, with many observers saying that bioethics debates have simply become partisan politics with dueling democratic and republican bioethicists. While this crisis is contained to the task of recommending ethical policy to the government, there is risk that it will spread to the other tasks conducted by bioethicists. To understand how this situation came into being, and the solution to this problem, this book closely examines the history of the bioethics profession. Bioethics debates were originally dominated by theologians, but came to be dominated by the emerging profession of bioethics due to the subtle and slow involvement of the government as the primary consumer of bioethical arguments. However, after the 1980s the views of the government changed, making bioethical arguments not quite so legitimate. With this knowledge of the sociological processes that lead to this evolution, the book proposes a radical solution to the crisis, which is for the bioethics profession to give up on some of the work that it currently does so that it can focus upon its strengths, and change the way the profession makes ethical arguments.Less
Seemingly every day society faces a new ethical challenge raised by a scientific innovation. Human genetic engineering, stem cell research, face transplantation, synthetic biology – all were science fiction only a few decades ago, but are now all are reality. How do we as a society decide whether these technologies are ethical? For decades professional bioethicists have served as a mediator between a busy public and decision-makers, helping people understand their own ethical concerns, framing arguments, discrediting illogical claims and lifting up promising ones. These bioethicists operate in multiple venues such as hospital decision-making, institutions that conduct research on humans, and recommending ethical policy to the government. While functioning quite well for many years, the bioethics profession is in crisis. Policy-makers are less inclined to take the advice of bioethics professionals, with many observers saying that bioethics debates have simply become partisan politics with dueling democratic and republican bioethicists. While this crisis is contained to the task of recommending ethical policy to the government, there is risk that it will spread to the other tasks conducted by bioethicists. To understand how this situation came into being, and the solution to this problem, this book closely examines the history of the bioethics profession. Bioethics debates were originally dominated by theologians, but came to be dominated by the emerging profession of bioethics due to the subtle and slow involvement of the government as the primary consumer of bioethical arguments. However, after the 1980s the views of the government changed, making bioethical arguments not quite so legitimate. With this knowledge of the sociological processes that lead to this evolution, the book proposes a radical solution to the crisis, which is for the bioethics profession to give up on some of the work that it currently does so that it can focus upon its strengths, and change the way the profession makes ethical arguments.
M. Cathleen Kaveny
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0011
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
The report produced by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission at the request of President Bill Clinton, titled Cloning Human Beings, provides a good example of the two-pronged approach to ...
More
The report produced by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission at the request of President Bill Clinton, titled Cloning Human Beings, provides a good example of the two-pronged approach to religion in bioethics. The report merits careful scrutiny precisely because of the deftness with which it appears to negotiate the thorny questions surrounding the role of religion in public policy. Analysis of the structure, arguments, and rhetoric of the report reveals the theoretical and practical inadequacy of the currently reigning two-pronged approach to the role of religious perspectives in the field of bioethics.Less
The report produced by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission at the request of President Bill Clinton, titled Cloning Human Beings, provides a good example of the two-pronged approach to religion in bioethics. The report merits careful scrutiny precisely because of the deftness with which it appears to negotiate the thorny questions surrounding the role of religion in public policy. Analysis of the structure, arguments, and rhetoric of the report reveals the theoretical and practical inadequacy of the currently reigning two-pronged approach to the role of religious perspectives in the field of bioethics.
Thérèse Murphy (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- May 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199562572
- eISBN:
- 9780191705328
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562572.001.0001
- Subject:
- Law, Intellectual Property, IT, and Media Law, Human Rights and Immigration
The first IVF baby was born in the 1970s. Less than twenty years later, cloning and GM food were popular talking-points, and information and communication technologies had transformed everyday life. ...
More
The first IVF baby was born in the 1970s. Less than twenty years later, cloning and GM food were popular talking-points, and information and communication technologies had transformed everyday life. In 2000, the first map of the human genome was sequenced. More recently there has been much discussion of the economic and social benefits of nanotechnology. This book contributes to increasing calls for regulation — or better regulation — of these and other new technologies. Drawing on an international team of legal scholars, it reviews and develops the role of human rights in the regulation of new technologies. Three controversies at the intersection between human rights and new technologies are given particular attention. First, are human rights contributing to a brave new world of choice, where human dignity is fundamentally compromised? Second, are new technologies a threat to human rights? Finally, can human rights contribute to better regulation of these technologies?Less
The first IVF baby was born in the 1970s. Less than twenty years later, cloning and GM food were popular talking-points, and information and communication technologies had transformed everyday life. In 2000, the first map of the human genome was sequenced. More recently there has been much discussion of the economic and social benefits of nanotechnology. This book contributes to increasing calls for regulation — or better regulation — of these and other new technologies. Drawing on an international team of legal scholars, it reviews and develops the role of human rights in the regulation of new technologies. Three controversies at the intersection between human rights and new technologies are given particular attention. First, are human rights contributing to a brave new world of choice, where human dignity is fundamentally compromised? Second, are new technologies a threat to human rights? Finally, can human rights contribute to better regulation of these technologies?
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
This book discusses the role of religion in a religiously pluralistic liberal society, namely the United States. Nowhere else in the public realm do the fundamental religious questions about the ...
More
This book discusses the role of religion in a religiously pluralistic liberal society, namely the United States. Nowhere else in the public realm do the fundamental religious questions about the meaning and nature of life arise in a context where resort to a political answer is the norm. Many people continue to insist that the US Constitution precludes religious participation in the political process, while others insist that by denying a role to religion we fundamentally discriminate against people of faith. As the chapters in this book demonstrate, the issues are complex and multifaceted. The book address such specific and highly contested issues as assisted suicide, stem cell research, cloning, reproductive health, and alternative medicine as well as general questions concerning as who legitimately speaks for religion in public bioethics, what religion can add to our understanding of justice, and the value of faith-based contributions to healthcare. The book begins with overview chapters about the role of religion in bioethics since the inception of the field. It then explores that role in the formation of public policy in terms of sociology, critical studies, philosophy, and religious studies. The book questions the distinction between public policy bioethics and clinical care, recognizing the close interconnection between the two. It offers insight on how religion shapes questions of justice in patient care and the ethical tools provided by Islam, Buddhism, and Evangelical Christianity that can be used both in advocating for public policy and in making individual care decisions. Over the last five to ten years, researchers have begun to explore the efficacy of religion as a mode of treatment.Less
This book discusses the role of religion in a religiously pluralistic liberal society, namely the United States. Nowhere else in the public realm do the fundamental religious questions about the meaning and nature of life arise in a context where resort to a political answer is the norm. Many people continue to insist that the US Constitution precludes religious participation in the political process, while others insist that by denying a role to religion we fundamentally discriminate against people of faith. As the chapters in this book demonstrate, the issues are complex and multifaceted. The book address such specific and highly contested issues as assisted suicide, stem cell research, cloning, reproductive health, and alternative medicine as well as general questions concerning as who legitimately speaks for religion in public bioethics, what religion can add to our understanding of justice, and the value of faith-based contributions to healthcare. The book begins with overview chapters about the role of religion in bioethics since the inception of the field. It then explores that role in the formation of public policy in terms of sociology, critical studies, philosophy, and religious studies. The book questions the distinction between public policy bioethics and clinical care, recognizing the close interconnection between the two. It offers insight on how religion shapes questions of justice in patient care and the ethical tools provided by Islam, Buddhism, and Evangelical Christianity that can be used both in advocating for public policy and in making individual care decisions. Over the last five to ten years, researchers have begun to explore the efficacy of religion as a mode of treatment.
David E. Guinn, Edward W. Keyserlingk, and Wendy Morton
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0010
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
This chapter argues that ethics plays an extremely important role in decision making and lawmaking in bioethics issues. These decisions are not simple case-by-case judgments; rather, they rest upon ...
More
This chapter argues that ethics plays an extremely important role in decision making and lawmaking in bioethics issues. These decisions are not simple case-by-case judgments; rather, they rest upon deeply considered ethical opinions. It also discusses the implications of this epistemic grounding for bioethics and its use of case law materials as an ethical resource. Finally, since many people base their moral judgments on religious beliefs, the religious implications of this legal-moral relationship are considered.Less
This chapter argues that ethics plays an extremely important role in decision making and lawmaking in bioethics issues. These decisions are not simple case-by-case judgments; rather, they rest upon deeply considered ethical opinions. It also discusses the implications of this epistemic grounding for bioethics and its use of case law materials as an ethical resource. Finally, since many people base their moral judgments on religious beliefs, the religious implications of this legal-moral relationship are considered.
Karen Lebacqz
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0012
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
Thirty years ago, both the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research and the collaborative team of Tom L. Beauchamp and James Childress placed ...
More
Thirty years ago, both the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research and the collaborative team of Tom L. Beauchamp and James Childress placed justice on a short list of principles that should undergird medical treatment and research. It is difficult to sort out contributions of religious or theological ethics to justice theory in bioethics. Nonetheless, some claims can be made both for the influence of religious ethics on the public discussion of bioethics and for the distinctive voice of religious or theological ethics in matters of justice. Taking a biblically based view of justice, it is argued at that a religious view (1) extends the scope of justice; (2) makes oppression and liberation primary categories for understanding justice; and (3) makes justice the first principle rather than the second or third.Less
Thirty years ago, both the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research and the collaborative team of Tom L. Beauchamp and James Childress placed justice on a short list of principles that should undergird medical treatment and research. It is difficult to sort out contributions of religious or theological ethics to justice theory in bioethics. Nonetheless, some claims can be made both for the influence of religious ethics on the public discussion of bioethics and for the distinctive voice of religious or theological ethics in matters of justice. Taking a biblically based view of justice, it is argued at that a religious view (1) extends the scope of justice; (2) makes oppression and liberation primary categories for understanding justice; and (3) makes justice the first principle rather than the second or third.
Nigel M. de S. Cameron
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0015
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
The series of policy positions of the US administration in the opening years of the “biotech century” in respect to cloning, embryonic stem cell research, and the patenting of human embryos offers a ...
More
The series of policy positions of the US administration in the opening years of the “biotech century” in respect to cloning, embryonic stem cell research, and the patenting of human embryos offers a case study in the development of public policy that, though it has been developed in the context of secular argument, reflects distinctive concerns of Christian theology. Through several events (including the development of mammalian cloning by somatic cell nuclear transfer, the pursuit by Bill Clinton's administration of a workaround for congressional bans on embryo research, the UN Franco-German cloning initiative, and concerns over intellectual property claims on human nature), the Bush administration has confronted a series of policy decisions affecting the ethical-legal framework for biotechnology. Though there has been little explicitly Christian reflection within the bioethics community, Christians together with other thinkers have recognized that these questions could determine the scope and course of developments in biotechnology.Less
The series of policy positions of the US administration in the opening years of the “biotech century” in respect to cloning, embryonic stem cell research, and the patenting of human embryos offers a case study in the development of public policy that, though it has been developed in the context of secular argument, reflects distinctive concerns of Christian theology. Through several events (including the development of mammalian cloning by somatic cell nuclear transfer, the pursuit by Bill Clinton's administration of a workaround for congressional bans on embryo research, the UN Franco-German cloning initiative, and concerns over intellectual property claims on human nature), the Bush administration has confronted a series of policy decisions affecting the ethical-legal framework for biotechnology. Though there has been little explicitly Christian reflection within the bioethics community, Christians together with other thinkers have recognized that these questions could determine the scope and course of developments in biotechnology.
Michele Goodwin
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0018
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
The domains of religious doctrine and practice provide ground for double bind analysis, particularly as applied to race, religion, and bioethics. In these spheres, reconciling church doctrine with ...
More
The domains of religious doctrine and practice provide ground for double bind analysis, particularly as applied to race, religion, and bioethics. In these spheres, reconciling church doctrine with social or medical practice is often challenging; the demands from each sphere are unique and sometimes irreconcilable. This chapter uses double bind theory as a framework to engage in a dialogue concerning race, religion, and bioethics. It offers a dialogue that scrutinizes conservative religious thought in what is colloquially known as the “black church” regarding the challenges of medical ethics and race.Less
The domains of religious doctrine and practice provide ground for double bind analysis, particularly as applied to race, religion, and bioethics. In these spheres, reconciling church doctrine with social or medical practice is often challenging; the demands from each sphere are unique and sometimes irreconcilable. This chapter uses double bind theory as a framework to engage in a dialogue concerning race, religion, and bioethics. It offers a dialogue that scrutinizes conservative religious thought in what is colloquially known as the “black church” regarding the challenges of medical ethics and race.
David E. Guinn
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
This introductory chapter lays some of the groundwork for the discussion of religion and public bioethics. It attempts to raise the questions commonly cited by the critics of public religion and ...
More
This introductory chapter lays some of the groundwork for the discussion of religion and public bioethics. It attempts to raise the questions commonly cited by the critics of public religion and provide a preliminary response that has been built on and elaborated by many of the contributors to this book. An overview of the topics covered in this volume is presented.Less
This introductory chapter lays some of the groundwork for the discussion of religion and public bioethics. It attempts to raise the questions commonly cited by the critics of public religion and provide a preliminary response that has been built on and elaborated by many of the contributors to this book. An overview of the topics covered in this volume is presented.
Albert R. Jonsen
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0002
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
“Bioethics began in religion, but religion has faded from bioethics.” This interpretation is commonplace among many who have an opinion on bioethics. This chapter examines this.
“Bioethics began in religion, but religion has faded from bioethics.” This interpretation is commonplace among many who have an opinion on bioethics. This chapter examines this.
Lisa Sowle Cahill
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0003
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
For at least two decades, the role of theology in public matters has been governed by what might be termed a “liberal consensus”. This consensus, shared by policymakers, theologians, philosophers, ...
More
For at least two decades, the role of theology in public matters has been governed by what might be termed a “liberal consensus”. This consensus, shared by policymakers, theologians, philosophers, and the public, has two parts. First, that law and public policy need to be considered in terms of individual liberties and rights. Second, that the only appropriate “public” language in which to justify, qualify, and reconcile liberties and rights should be neutral, secular, and rational. The thesis of this chapter is that such a framing of the issues is outmoded. To begin with, the “secular” sphere is not neutral, since all participants inevitably come from communities which have identity. Therefore, it is appropriate to use religious narratives and language, or those of any moral tradition (which includes liberalism), as long as they are not propounded dogmatically or in a way that undermines democratic process and participatory politics.Less
For at least two decades, the role of theology in public matters has been governed by what might be termed a “liberal consensus”. This consensus, shared by policymakers, theologians, philosophers, and the public, has two parts. First, that law and public policy need to be considered in terms of individual liberties and rights. Second, that the only appropriate “public” language in which to justify, qualify, and reconcile liberties and rights should be neutral, secular, and rational. The thesis of this chapter is that such a framing of the issues is outmoded. To begin with, the “secular” sphere is not neutral, since all participants inevitably come from communities which have identity. Therefore, it is appropriate to use religious narratives and language, or those of any moral tradition (which includes liberalism), as long as they are not propounded dogmatically or in a way that undermines democratic process and participatory politics.
John H. Evans
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0004
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
This chapter discusses the various meanings of the two critical ideas in this book and compares them. These critical ideas are “religion” and “public bioethics”. The chapter focuses most of all not ...
More
This chapter discusses the various meanings of the two critical ideas in this book and compares them. These critical ideas are “religion” and “public bioethics”. The chapter focuses most of all not on the different religious roles, but on what we think “public bioethics” is or should be.Less
This chapter discusses the various meanings of the two critical ideas in this book and compares them. These critical ideas are “religion” and “public bioethics”. The chapter focuses most of all not on the different religious roles, but on what we think “public bioethics” is or should be.
M. Therese Lysaught
David E. Guinn (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195178739
- eISBN:
- 9780199784943
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195178734.003.0006
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
This chapter argues that bioethics should properly be understood as a disciplinary matrix that serves the modern Leviathan of state and market. The purpose of doing so, of course, is to narrate a ...
More
This chapter argues that bioethics should properly be understood as a disciplinary matrix that serves the modern Leviathan of state and market. The purpose of doing so, of course, is to narrate a rather different vision of “public bioethics”. For without a more accurate accounting of the nature and function of public bioethics, it will not be possible to begin to posit how “religion” might even begin to position itself in relationship to it.Less
This chapter argues that bioethics should properly be understood as a disciplinary matrix that serves the modern Leviathan of state and market. The purpose of doing so, of course, is to narrate a rather different vision of “public bioethics”. For without a more accurate accounting of the nature and function of public bioethics, it will not be possible to begin to posit how “religion” might even begin to position itself in relationship to it.
Henry S. Richardson
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- January 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780195388930
- eISBN:
- 9780199979196
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195388930.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
Interacting innocently with others, we can become morally entangled with their affairs, despite neither party having intended this. This route to obligation—underexplored by moral philosophers—is of ...
More
Interacting innocently with others, we can become morally entangled with their affairs, despite neither party having intended this. This route to obligation—underexplored by moral philosophers—is of great practical importance to those engaged in medical research on human subjects. Medical researchers encounter all sorts of medical needs in their human subjects. Malaria researchers working in rural Africa may encounter malaria, schistosomiasis, HIV, and other diseases. Brain-scan studies in high-tech research hospitals may reveal suspicious anomalies in the brains of normal volunteers. These subjects may need ancillary care from the researchers: medical care not required to carry out the study safely and soundly. Currently, no authoritative ethical guidance covers such situations. This book’s author’s partial-entrustment model has been the leading principled account of medical researchers’ ancillary-care obligations. Here, this book buttresses and extends this model, newly explaining how these obligations arise as moral entanglements to which researchers open themselves by accepting special permissions to examine study participants’ bodies, collect their bodily fluids and tissues, and probe their medical histories. In addition to providing a full-dress philosophical defense for the partial-entrustment model, this book addresses the most important concrete and practical issues that arise regarding ancillary care, including justice, exploitation, waivability, and prioritization. The book closes by noting issues needing further exploration, broader philosophical implications, and practical steps we can take now.Less
Interacting innocently with others, we can become morally entangled with their affairs, despite neither party having intended this. This route to obligation—underexplored by moral philosophers—is of great practical importance to those engaged in medical research on human subjects. Medical researchers encounter all sorts of medical needs in their human subjects. Malaria researchers working in rural Africa may encounter malaria, schistosomiasis, HIV, and other diseases. Brain-scan studies in high-tech research hospitals may reveal suspicious anomalies in the brains of normal volunteers. These subjects may need ancillary care from the researchers: medical care not required to carry out the study safely and soundly. Currently, no authoritative ethical guidance covers such situations. This book’s author’s partial-entrustment model has been the leading principled account of medical researchers’ ancillary-care obligations. Here, this book buttresses and extends this model, newly explaining how these obligations arise as moral entanglements to which researchers open themselves by accepting special permissions to examine study participants’ bodies, collect their bodily fluids and tissues, and probe their medical histories. In addition to providing a full-dress philosophical defense for the partial-entrustment model, this book addresses the most important concrete and practical issues that arise regarding ancillary care, including justice, exploitation, waivability, and prioritization. The book closes by noting issues needing further exploration, broader philosophical implications, and practical steps we can take now.
Anja J. Karnein
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199782475
- eISBN:
- 9780199933297
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199782475.001.0001
- Subject:
- Law, Philosophy of Law
In light of new biomedical technologies, such as artificial reproduction, stem cell research, genetic selection and design, the question of what we owe to future persons and unborn life more ...
More
In light of new biomedical technologies, such as artificial reproduction, stem cell research, genetic selection and design, the question of what we owe to future persons and unborn life more generally, is as contested as ever. This book offers a new theory by showing how our commitments to persons can help us make sense of our obligations to unborn life. These commitments give us reasons to treat embryos that will develop into persons in anticipation of these persons. By contrast, embryos, which women want to abort or refuse to implant, can be discarded or used for research purposes. How viable is this theory? The book explores its attractiveness for Germany and the U.S.—two countries with very different approaches to valuing unborn life. However, another question raised by modern biomedical technologies concerns the legitimacy of genetically selecting and manipulating embryos. Parents might want to create persons with particular genetic properties. The book maintains that only some uses of these technologies do not violate what respect for persons, including those of the future, requires. Genetic interventions can only be legitimate if used to insure future persons’ independence. With this claim the book’s theory runs counter to liberal eugenic approaches that give parents wide-ranging entitlements to interfere with their future child’s genome, in the names of reproductive freedom, enhancing the species or social justice.Less
In light of new biomedical technologies, such as artificial reproduction, stem cell research, genetic selection and design, the question of what we owe to future persons and unborn life more generally, is as contested as ever. This book offers a new theory by showing how our commitments to persons can help us make sense of our obligations to unborn life. These commitments give us reasons to treat embryos that will develop into persons in anticipation of these persons. By contrast, embryos, which women want to abort or refuse to implant, can be discarded or used for research purposes. How viable is this theory? The book explores its attractiveness for Germany and the U.S.—two countries with very different approaches to valuing unborn life. However, another question raised by modern biomedical technologies concerns the legitimacy of genetically selecting and manipulating embryos. Parents might want to create persons with particular genetic properties. The book maintains that only some uses of these technologies do not violate what respect for persons, including those of the future, requires. Genetic interventions can only be legitimate if used to insure future persons’ independence. With this claim the book’s theory runs counter to liberal eugenic approaches that give parents wide-ranging entitlements to interfere with their future child’s genome, in the names of reproductive freedom, enhancing the species or social justice.
John H. Evans
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199860852
- eISBN:
- 9780199932474
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199860852.003.0003
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, General
Theologians and their allies raised the interest of the public, and eventually Congress, on these issues. Congress created two venues of decision-making, research bioethics and public policy ...
More
Theologians and their allies raised the interest of the public, and eventually Congress, on these issues. Congress created two venues of decision-making, research bioethics and public policy bioethics, and some entrepreneurial professionals created an ethical system for use in these venues. This ethical system is called common morality, and its methods include the use of consensus among diverse professionals as well as what came to be known as common morality principlism. This became dominant in bioethical debate because it fit with the needs of its consumers in the bureaucratic state. The bioethics profession, armed with these methods, won jurisdiction from the theologians in these two venues, as well as in health care ethics consultation.Less
Theologians and their allies raised the interest of the public, and eventually Congress, on these issues. Congress created two venues of decision-making, research bioethics and public policy bioethics, and some entrepreneurial professionals created an ethical system for use in these venues. This ethical system is called common morality, and its methods include the use of consensus among diverse professionals as well as what came to be known as common morality principlism. This became dominant in bioethical debate because it fit with the needs of its consumers in the bureaucratic state. The bioethics profession, armed with these methods, won jurisdiction from the theologians in these two venues, as well as in health care ethics consultation.
Adam G. Cooper
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199546626
- eISBN:
- 9780191720208
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199546626.003.0007
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology
Every moral system, even those that reject the notion of morality, has its metaphysical assumptions. Clandestine moral codes lie beneath the most avante garde philosophies. What we should do with and ...
More
Every moral system, even those that reject the notion of morality, has its metaphysical assumptions. Clandestine moral codes lie beneath the most avante garde philosophies. What we should do with and as our bodies depends on what we make of our bodies, what we understand them to be in relation to the total human project. What is good for the flesh depends on what is true of the flesh, a matter enlightened by intelligent thought, human experience, and, above all, the truth of God made flesh.Less
Every moral system, even those that reject the notion of morality, has its metaphysical assumptions. Clandestine moral codes lie beneath the most avante garde philosophies. What we should do with and as our bodies depends on what we make of our bodies, what we understand them to be in relation to the total human project. What is good for the flesh depends on what is true of the flesh, a matter enlightened by intelligent thought, human experience, and, above all, the truth of God made flesh.
