Asian Bioethics Review最新文献

{"title":"What can Bioethics Learn from Asia?","authors":"Graeme T. Laurie","doi":"10.1007/s41649-026-00425-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-026-00425-0","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 4","pages":"701 - 705"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149098030","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 True Physician and the Way of Care: a Zhuangzian Account of Healing","authors":"Andrew Joshua Parra","doi":"10.1007/s41649-026-00420-5","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-026-00420-5","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper develops the figure of the <i>zhenyi</i> (真医, “True Physician”), as a model of clinical excellence grounded in the philosophy of the <i>Zhuangzi</i>. Through the interrelated concepts of Dao (道), <i>De</i> (德), and <i>Tian</i> (天), and the practices of <i>wuwei</i> (无为) and <i>xinzhai</i> (心斋), the True Physician learns to perceive a patient’s life with sensitivity to its particularity, context, and natural unfolding. Contemporary medical ethics has done substantial work mapping the moral obligations and relational commitments of clinical practice. Such inquiries have tended to presuppose a prior capacity for perception and judgment, leaving comparatively underexplored the formation of that capacity and the habits and conceptual frameworks that shape what a clinician is able to notice. The Zhuangzian resources developed here, address this dimension, articulating how perceptual openness can be cultivated and rigid categories cleared, so that clinical action arises from true attunement to a patient’s life. The resulting account complements existing approaches by foregrounding the perceptual formation on which deliberation and care depend.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 4","pages":"781 - 797"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149099010","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":"Beyond Procedural Universalism: Relational Ethics and the Limits of Global Public Health Codes","authors":"John D. Adolfo","doi":"10.1007/s41649-026-00416-1","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-026-00416-1","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper argues that global public health ethics remains normatively incomplete, privileging Euro-American moral ontologies centered on individual autonomy, institutional authority, and procedural rationality, while marginalizing relational, communal, and character-based dimensions of moral life. It develops a relational ethical framework informed by Filipino moral philosophy, grounded in the interrelated concepts of <i>kapwa</i> (shared personhood), <i>bayanihan</i> (collective moral agency), and <i>pagpapakatao</i> (relational moral character), and advances these not merely as cultural descriptors but as normative responses that generate evaluative standards, guide ethical judgment, and justify action in public health contexts. The paper situates its contribution within existing debates on epistemic injustice and relational ethics while explicitly acknowledging the heterogeneity of moral traditions across the Global South. It further develops a sustained objection–reply engagement addressing relativism and defends a model of context-sensitive normativity grounded in shared human conditions of vulnerability and interdependence. The argument is supported through empirical illustrations drawn from disaster response, caregiving practices, and community health systems beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, the paper advances a methods–normativity bridge, demonstrating how participatory approaches such as Participatory Action Research (PAR) generate ethical validity through co-produced standards. The paper concludes by proposing a methodologically transferable model for global bioethics that advances relational, pluralistic, and contextually grounded ethical practice without collapsing into relativism or cultural exceptionalism.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 4","pages":"727 - 740"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149098795","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":"Regulation and (In)tolerance in Bioethics","authors":"Graeme T. Laurie","doi":"10.1007/s41649-026-00418-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-026-00418-z","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 3","pages":"509 - 513"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148425180","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":"Re: Ethical and Regulatory Gaps in Aesthetic Medical Practice in Top Asian Medical Tourism Destinations","authors":"Kanny Ooi","doi":"10.1007/s41649-026-00409-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-026-00409-0","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In 2024, an Asian Bioethics Review paper titled ‘Ethical and regulatory gaps in aesthetic medical practice in top Asian medical tourism destinations’ discussed the regulation of aesthetic medicine in India, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea and Thailand. The author identified regulatory gaps in each country and suggested measures to ensure patient safety and improve public trust. However, on closer examination, some of the author’s recommendations are neither viable nor sufficiently far-reaching to protect patient safety. As such, this commentary seeks to outline additional measures that facilitate greater accountability and public protection. While many of those measures place restraints on how aesthetic doctors practise, patient safety must be prioritised if aesthetic doctors seek to grow their practice in a sustainable manner.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 4","pages":"717 - 725"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149098532","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":"Beyond Vice and Virtue: The Collective Utilitarian Case against the Normalization of Solo Reproduction","authors":"Adrian Villalba","doi":"10.1007/s41649-026-00410-7","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-026-00410-7","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In their recent article <i>Solones, Solo Reproduction and Vice,</i> Muralidharan and Savulescu successfully dismantle the “yuck factor” surrounding solo reproduction, and they argue that accusations of narcissism or hubris are insufficient grounds for prohibition. However, by framing the debate primarily through the lens of individual virtue and immediate harm to the offspring, they overlook a more profound consequentialist challenge. This response argues that the primary ethical danger of solo reproduction is not moral vice but ecological risk. Drawing on total and preference utilitarianism, I contend that while solo reproduction is not inherently immoral, its normalization poses a threat to the “Big Genome” which is the shared genetic patrimony of humanity. A reduction in genetic diversity risks compromising our species’ adaptability and resilience to pathogens and capacity for future medical innovation. Thus, while we should not ban the practice, bioethics must actively discourage it in favor of preserving the genetic commons.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 4","pages":"707 - 715"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149098544","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":"Is Digital Healthcare Better Than None? The Digital Health Technology Dilemma in Low-Income Countries","authors":"Brandon Ferlito,&nbsp;Heidi Mertes","doi":"10.1007/s41649-025-00395-9","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-025-00395-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Digital health technologies (DHTs) are often promoted as solutions to healthcare access challenges in low-income countries (LICs), where a lack of infrastructure, healthcare professionals, and regulatory capacity makes them especially appealing. In such contexts, DHTs can provide services that would otherwise remain out of reach. Yet their implementation raises significant ethical and regulatory concerns. These concerns are heightened in LICs, where technologies designed in high-income countries may perform less reliably, accountability is weak, and corporate interests often dominate development and governance. This paper compares DHTs with Early Access Programmes (EAPs) for investigational therapies, both of which involve offering imperfect interventions under conditions of uncertainty. While EAPs are tightly regulated, DHTs are often introduced with limited oversight and marketed as final solutions. Unlike pharmaceuticals, which carry immediate risks such as severe side effects, the risks associated with DHTs are typically indirect or delayed, manifesting through misdiagnoses, breaches of privacy and confidentiality, digital inequalities, and the erosion of trust in healthcare systems. Using examples from Uganda and Malawi, the analysis highlights how permissive adoption risks promoting a ‘better than nothing’ standard of care, while rigid regulation may deny immediate benefits. We argue for a tiered approach: conditional, context-sensitive oversight that expands access without normalising lower standards of care, embedding privacy, confidentiality, equity, and accountability as central design criteria.</p>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 4","pages":"761 - 780"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s41649-025-00395-9.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149098348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Trustworthy Governance of Genomic and Health-Related Data: Lessons from Singapore","authors":"Angela Ballantyne,&nbsp;G. Owen Schaefer,&nbsp;Ainsley J. Newson,&nbsp;Vicki Xafis,&nbsp;Hui Jin Toh,&nbsp;Serene Ong,&nbsp;Tamra Lysaght,&nbsp;E Shyong Tai","doi":"10.1007/s41649-025-00397-7","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-025-00397-7","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Precision medicine (PM) is an approach to research and healthcare delivery driven by insights from linked genomic, epigenetic, clinical, behavioural, and environmental data. Data sharing for PM, especially between parties with divergent strategic and commercial interests, requires balancing competing values, creating a trusted data ecosystem, and maintaining social license. This paper integrates findings from normative bioethics and empirical research in Singapore to discern recommendations for guidance on the ethical governance of genomic and health data. We distil findings from mixed methods research in Singapore and map these onto Kalkman et al.’s themes and principles for data sharing. Based on our normative and empirical analyses, we argue that the values of public benefit, fairness, accountability, and transparency are critical for maintaining social license for PM in Singapore. Consent is important but insufficient to secure public trust or support for data sharing if these other normative values are not achieved. Contrary to assertions in much of the existing bioethics literature on genomic and health data sharing, we found that different consent options (such as specific versus broad consent) had little impact on social license for data sharing. Our analysis provides empirically grounded, contextually appropriate, responsive normative guidance for trustworthy data governance in Singapore. While our findings are specific to Singapore's cultural and institutional context, our methodological approach and the relative de-emphasis of individual consent models offer important insights for other jurisdictions developing PM programs, particularly in non-Western settings where collective values may take precedence over individual autonomy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 4","pages":"847 - 868"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149098347","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":"A Qualitative Comparative Study of the Doctor-Patient Relationship Model and Decision-Making Style among Chinese and Japanese Doctors","authors":"Hua Xu,&nbsp;Taketoshi Okita,&nbsp;Masao Tabata,&nbsp;Atsushi Asai","doi":"10.1007/s41649-025-00389-7","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-025-00389-7","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The nature of doctor-patient relationships (DPRs) and decision-making style (DMS) is related to patient satisfaction, clinical outcomes, and the occurrence of disputes. Given the importance of understanding the current state of DPRs, we conducted an exploratory analysis of the current state of DPRs and DMS in clinical settings in China and Japan. We explored similarities and differences between the two countries, as well as influential factors in DPRs and DMS. Twenty doctors in China and 20 doctors in Japan were recruited through the authors’ personal networks as well as snowball sampling, and semi-structured interviews were conducted. Doctors were asked about mainstream DPR models and DMS in current medical practice, and their responses were analyzed using qualitative descriptive methods. Results of the analysis suggest that, in both China and Japan, a diverse mosaic of DPRs and DMS coexists. In both countries, there are paternalistic relationships between doctors and patients, as well as teacher-and-student relationships, but there are also cases in which patients make final decisions and those which adopt shared decision-making. Some doctors referred to DPRs as a friendship. Furthermore, attitudes of individual doctors and patients, the medical environment, trust between the two parties, and national and cultural characteristics strongly impact the formation of DPRs. Our findings highlight the importance of carefully monitoring the current state and various influencing factors of DPRs in order to realize effective human relationships in clinical settings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 3","pages":"583 - 610"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13350565/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148424682","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Regulations Governing Sex Selection in Bangladesh: Implications of Islamic Law and Ethics","authors":"Sanwar Siraj,&nbsp;Yousuf Ali,&nbsp;Jahid Siraz Chowdhury,&nbsp;Kamrul Hasan","doi":"10.1007/s41649-025-00399-5","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s41649-025-00399-5","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Sex selection for medical purposes is a widely accepted method primarily aimed at preventing the transmission of X-linked genetic disorders to future generations. However, sex selection for socio-cultural or nonmedical reasons—e.g., personal preference for a specific gender or family balancing issues—has been a debated issue in health law, public policy, and ethics in many countries, including Bangladesh. Recently, the Bangladesh High Court ordered the government to ban prenatal sex selection for nonmedical reasons. In response, the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS) proposed national guidelines for healthcare providers, requiring hospitals, diagnostic centers, and clinics to strictly prevent the disclosure of fetal sex during pregnancy. This paper argues that the guidelines should be updated to include a ban on all forms of sex selection for nonmedical reasons. Islamic law prohibits all types of nonmedical sex selection because they are against the will of Almighty Allah. Muslims believe that Allah alone creates human life and that humans do not have the authority to determine the sex of the fetus. International documents and conventions also oppose sex selection for nonmedical reasons, viewing it as discriminatory, especially in societies with deep-rooted gender biases. Therefore, this paper asserts that a comprehensive legal framework—specifically enacted by the Bangladesh Parliament—is necessary to ban all forms of sex selection for nonmedical reasons. Additionally, legislation alone may not be sufficient, as it might unintentionally allow discriminatory practices to continue elsewhere in society. Instead, a holistic approach is needed—one that includes socio-cultural shifts through education and awareness campaigns promoting gender equality, the empowerment of women and girls, and their economic independence. These strategies are crucial for addressing the root causes of gender-based preferences and building a more equitable society.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 3","pages":"681 - 699"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13350615/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148425168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}