Monash Bioethics Review最新文献

{"title":"Kantian political philosophy, coercion, and public health.","authors":"Remco J L van Dijk, Justin S Bernstein","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00239-0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00239-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many public health policies are coercive and therefore, they require moral justification. Kantian political philosophy is an under-explored but appealing approach to public health ethics. According to the Kantian approach, which is centred around freedom as independence, the state has an important role in protecting that freedom. In doing so, the state is justified to use coercion. To illustrate the Kantian approach, we consider its implications in the context of coercive vaccination policy. We show coercive vaccination policies are justified, because the state is needed to provide determinacy, because such policies are needed to guarantee the systematic enjoyment of the right to freedom, and because such policies reduce the risk for dependence on others.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143803309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Where infectious diseases occur: restrictive measures and the concept of place.","authors":"Diego S Silva","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00237-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00237-2","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Greater attention should be given to place when considering whether to, and how to, implement restrictive measures in response to infectious disease outbreaks and pandemics. Human beings cannot experience the world except in place, while place allows us to act ethically and in relation to other persons. Some have described place as a location with meaning to humans. Our individual and collective sense of meaning and identities are partly created in and by the places we live, while our sense of agency and security are shaped by them. Although taking the concept of place seriously is central to other disciplines and cultures, it is- with some notable exceptions- absent in the bioethics literature, including that of public health ethics. This paper attempts to outline how attending to the normative aspects of place can help explain some of our lingering COVID19-related trauma, as well as be used constructively in responding to future outbreaks when we cannot avoid the use of restrictive measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143744150","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Correction to: The value of lives in New Zealand.","authors":"Martin Lally","doi":"10.1007/s40592-024-00226-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-024-00226-x","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143744146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Differential impacts of vaccine mandates: subjective experiences and policy implications.","authors":"Mark C Navin, Rachel Gur-Arie, Katie Attwell","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00238-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00238-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Vaccine mandates are diverse policy instruments that impact people differently. This paper explores how different types of mandates may generate distinct subjective experiences of constraint, compulsion, or power across populations. We identify and analyze five key aspects of mandate policies that influence these experiences - (1) the alignment between individual preferences and mandate requirements, (2) the relationship between parents' and children's interests, (3) the experienced severity of sanctions, (4) the availability of reasonable alternatives, and (5) the power that the enforcing authority actually applies to particular persons - which are crucial for assessing mandates' effectiveness, identifying which populations are most affected, anticipating public responses, and informing ethical justifications. We remain neutral about whether these experiences constitute coercion, but we emphasize that these experiences may have ethical significance regardless of how they are categorized. This paper provides a foundation for future normative work by clarifying some of the complex landscape of vaccine mandate policies and their impacts, without explicitly defending a particular theory of coercion or public health justice.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143736141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Ending the organ trade: an ethical assessment of regulatory possibilities.","authors":"Andreas Albertsen","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00232-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00232-7","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While the trade of human organs are illegal and widely condemned, a black market flourishes. Estimates indicate that 10% of kidney transplants from living donors involve illegal payments to the kidney seller. This paper presents a typology for approaches aimed at curtailing the black market in human organs. The policies are evaluated from two perspectives: their ethical permissibility and their expected efficiency in ending and minimizing the trade in human organs. To end or minimize organ trading, we must reduce the organ shortage in order to reduce demand for organs, alleviate poverty to reduce the supply of organs, and disincentivize brokers and medical facilitators through a concerted effort to reduce the profit rate of the international organ trade.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143537861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Severe cognitive disability, medically complex children and long-term ventilation.","authors":"Helen Turnham, Dominic Wilkinson","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00234-5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00234-5","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Children with complex medical conditions including those with severe intellectual disability are living longer. For some, support with medical technology such as Long-Term Ventilation can prolong their lives further. Such technological supports can have significant implications for the child and her family and consume considerable resources though they can also offer real benefits. Sometimes clinicians question whether children with very severe cognitive impairments should have their life prolonged by technology, though they would be prepared to provide the same treatment in equivalent cases without cognitive disability. We describe and analyse four ways in which this view might be justified. Although it could be claimed that children with severe cognitive disability have lives that are not worth living, in most cases this view can and should be rejected. However, the burdens of life-prolonging technology may outweigh the benefits of such treatment either in the present or in the future. Consequently it might not be in their interests to provide such technology, or to ensure that it is provided as part of a time-limited trial. We also consider circumstances where medical technology could offer modest benefits to an individual, but resources are scarce. In the face of resource imitation, treatment may be prioritised to children who stand to benefit the most. This may in some circumstances, justify selectively withholding treatment from some medically complex children.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143516959","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Chasing 'vulnerability' across six decades of the Declaration of Helsinki.","authors":"Oskar Lindholm, Sakari Karjalainen, Veikko Launis","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00235-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00235-4","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The year 2024 marked the 60th anniversary of the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki (DoH). Coincidentally, the WMA published the 8th revision of this landmark document guiding medical research involving human subjects. One of the key changes in this latest revision concerns the notion of vulnerability, which has always been central to the DoH's ethos. The term 'vulnerability' was explicitly introduced in the 5th revision, published in 2000, which lists five vulnerable groups. Subsequent revisions have significantly altered how vulnerability is portrayed and understood within the document. This article traces the conceptualisation of vulnerability across the various versions of the DoH, culminating in its recently published 8th revision. We explore the underlying principles of each revision and examine how these principles have both influenced and been influenced by broader ethical discourses. Lastly, we address some of the challenges that future revisions must meet to ensure that the document remains internally coherent and practically applicable for researchers and research ethics committees alike.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143504655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The role of the ethics expert in Spanish legislation on euthanasia and mental health.","authors":"Sergio Ramos-Pozón","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00228-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00228-3","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article examines the assessment of mental capacity in the context of euthanasia, particularly when requested by patients with mental illnesses. It proposes a holistic alternative approach to the traditional functional model, arguing that the latter is insufficient to capture the complexity of these patients' decisions. Using approaches based on narrative, hermeneutic, and dialogical ethics, it offers an evaluation that considers the patient's life story, values, and context. Shared decision-making and empathy are identified as fundamental components to ensure informed and consensual decisions, promoting an environment of respect and mutual understanding. The article reviews Spanish legislation on euthanasia, highlighting the need to include medical ethics experts in the Guarantee and Evaluation Commissions. These experts provide a comprehensive ethical perspective essential for addressing the ethical complexities in euthanasia requests and ensuring fair decisions that reflect the patient's true will. It recommends reviewing and expanding current protocols, as well as including continuous ethics training to improve medical practice in this context. The conclusions suggest that an assessment of mental capacity based on ethical principles and an integrated narrative can significantly improve medical practice and decision-making in euthanasia, especially for these patients. Furthermore, the inclusion of ethics experts in the commissions can provide a more humane and just perspective, ensuring that decisions respect the patient's dignity and autonomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143426227","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Perceptions of members of ethics committees of medical institutions in India on controlled human infection studies (CHIS) following a sensitization workshop: a systematic survey.","authors":"Subitha Lakshminarayanan, P Muthu Kumaran, Suganya Jayaram, Jayanthi Mathaiyan, Medha Rajappa","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00231-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00231-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Controlled Human Infection Studies (CHIS) involving the deliberate exposure of healthy individuals to infectious agents, are emerging as a valuable tool for medical research. This systematic survey explores the perceptions of ethics committee members from various Indian medical research institutions after participating in a sensitization workshop on CHIS. This cross-sectional study was conducted on the workshop participants through an online survey. The workshop was held in a hybrid mode and around 60 participants from four tertiary care institutions and research institutes had participated. A structured questionnaire was used to assess their evolving perspectives, challenges, and recommendations related to CHIS and the effectiveness of the workshop. Both Likert scale and open-ended items were included in the survey. Responses are presented as percentage and views supported through the quotes from responses. Around 43 participants responded to the survey (72%). Participants acknowledged the potential benefits of CHIS but were concerned about the psychological harm and other risks. Challenges were identified in conducting and reviewing CHIS, including regulatory approvals, risk assessment, and robust informed consent. The need for development of regulatory guidelines, specialized training, risk mitigation strategies, community engagement, and compensation mechanisms were highlighted. The sensitization workshop was considered valuable in enhancing participants' understanding of CHIS, although participants expressed a need for continued training and experience to effectively review such studies. With the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) releasing a policy statement on ethical conduct of CHIS in India, this study provides a foundation for future capacity-building initiatives among ethics committee members. The findings emphasize the significance of ongoing dialogue to standardize the ethical review process for CHIS, thus facilitating their acceptance and realization in India's medical research landscape.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143411139","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Lessons from COVID-19 patient visitation restrictions: six considerations to help develop ethical patient visitor policies.","authors":"Tracy Beth Høeg, Benjamin Knudsen, Vinay Prasad","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00230-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00230-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patient visitor restrictions were implemented in unprecedented ways during the COVID-19 pandemic and included bans on any visitors to dying patients and bans separating mothers from infants. These were implemented without high quality evidence they would be beneficial and the harms to patients, families and medical personnel were often immediately clear. Evidence has also accumulated finding strict visitor restrictions were accompanied by long-term individual and societal consequences. We highlight numerous examples of restrictions that were enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic, including some that continue to be in place today. We outline six specific concerns about the nature and effects of the visitor restrictions seen during the COVID-19 pandemic. These considerations may help provide both an ethical and science-based framework, through which healthcare workers, families and government entities can work towards safeguarding patient and family rights and well-being.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143374586","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}