{"title":"Honesty in Human Subject Research.","authors":"Sungwoo Um","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10357-9","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-024-10357-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this paper, I discuss the ethical issues related to deception in human subject research in terms of honesty. First, I introduce the background and suggest the conception of honesty that understands it as involving respect for the right not to be deceived (RND). Next, I examine several ways to address the ethical issues of deceptive elements in the human subject research and show why they fail to adequately meet the demand of honesty. I focus on how to make an honest research plan and examine after participation and before participation phases in turn. Then I conclude by suggesting possible strategies to minimize dishonesty in human subject research.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"147-157"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12222396/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141753271","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Practising Less is More: An Exploration of What it Means to See \"This Patient\" Not a \"Patient Like This\".","authors":"M Bobbio, M Chiarlo, P Arcadi, E Kidd","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10378-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-024-10378-4","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the last decade literature focused on a \"less is more\" approach has been primarily represented by clinical cases describing the excesses of an aggressive, redundant, non-personalized, and non-respectful medicine. Most of these articles focus on a \"more is worse\" approach and centre around the downstream negative consequences of medical overuse. Having identified a gap in the literature on the experience and practice of less, rather than the harms of excess, we carried out an exploratory qualitative study into how a \"less is more\" approach works in practice. A hermeneutic phenomenological approach was adopted to allow us to examine the realm of lived experience as a valid data source and as a path from which to understand a \"less is more\" approach \"from the bedside.\" A Phenomenology of Practice was chosen as a more specific frame for this research because of its added focus on action and practical application in professional settings. Seventy stories written by physicians, patients, nurses, caregivers, and other health professionals have been received and analysed. These stories were gathered as part of a project called \"Slow Stories\" which aimed to collect clinical cases that have been positively resolved by adopting a \"less is more\" approach to patient care. After having conducted an in-depth analysis, separately and as a group, the researchers identified five key phenomenological themes; Time to relate is time to heal; Doing more does not mean doing better; Settings for a slow medicine; Slow care at the end of life; and Personalized vs. standardized treatment. Each of these themes offers insights into how a \"less is more\" approach can be used in practice and illustrates how a \"less is more\" strategy can play a significant role in positively resolving certain clinical cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"131-145"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142156544","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Lead Essay-Ethics in Geopolitical Conflicts: The First Casualty.","authors":"Paul A Komesaroff, Michael Ashby, Ian Kerridge","doi":"10.1007/s11673-025-10445-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-025-10445-4","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"7-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143630767","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Notes from the Rock Bottom.","authors":"Gila Svirsky","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10353-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-024-10353-z","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"61-62"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141082784","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Yfke Ongena, Thomas C Kwee, Derya Yakar, Marieke Haan
{"title":"Retrospective Radiology Research: Do We Need Informed Patient Consent?","authors":"Yfke Ongena, Thomas C Kwee, Derya Yakar, Marieke Haan","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10368-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-024-10368-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While knowledge of the population's view on the need for informed consent for retrospective radiology research may provide valuable insight into how an optimal balance can be achieved between patient rights versus an expedited advancement of radiology science, this is a topic that has been ignored in the literature so far. To investigate the view of the general population, survey data were collected from 2407 people representative of the Dutch population. The results indicate that for non-commercial institutions, especially hospitals (97.4 per cent), respondents agree with the retrospective use of imaging data, although they generally indicate that their explicit consent is required. However, most respondents (63.5 per cent) would never allow commercial firms to retrospectively use their imaging data. When including only respondents who completed the minimally required reading time of 12.3 s to understand the description about retrospective radiology research given in the survey (n = 770), almost all (98.9 per cent) mentioned to have no objections for their imaging data to be used by hospitals for retrospective research, with 57.9 per cent indicating their consent to be required and 41.0 per cent indicating that explicit patient consent to be unnecessary. We conclude that the general population permits retrospective radiology research by hospitals, and a substantial proportion indicates explicit patient consent to be unnecessary when understanding what retrospective radiology research entails. However, the general population's support for the unrestricted retrospective use of imaging data for research purposes without patient consent decreases for universities not linked to hospitals, other non-commercial institutions, government agencies, and particularly commercial firms.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"175-185"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12222269/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142001201","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Genome Editing Dilemma: Navigating Dual-Use Potential and Charting the Path Forward.","authors":"Ana Ruxandra Badea, Oliver Feeney","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10358-8","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-024-10358-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Contemporary genome editing techniques have made genomic intervention-from microorganism to human-more accessible, easier to use, and more accurate than previous methods. We argue that, notwithstanding its merits in treating and preventing disease in humans, genome editing represents a potential threat for domestic and international security, requiring an integrated approach in regulating, detecting, preventing, and mitigating the risk of its use for malicious purposes. Despite the global regulatory ambitions of the 2021 WHO framework, we see insufficient attention given to the future prospect of dual-use genomic technology. Drawing parallels with the nuclear field, we suggest tentative practical steps for a way forward in dealing with genome editing technologies, such as: 1) adapting national (bio)security and defence strategies to include genome editing as a possible threat (with conceivable WMD potential); 2) enhancing the international dialogue on genome editing and raising the issue at the highest level; 3) working towards a global, legally binding verification mechanism; 4) tracking genome editing technologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"101-110"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12222282/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141753270","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Ethics that Fails to Regulate War, Ethics that Enhances War.","authors":"Alphonso Lingis, Paul Komesaroff","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10395-3","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-024-10395-3","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This short perspective piece argues that wars are often conducted in settings where ethical injunctions are ignored or overridden and where ethical oversight is avoided or circumvented. This is particularly the case with intrastate conflicts and is exacerbated by novel military technologies. In these and other settings ethics is often invoked actually to promote or prolong war.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"47-49"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12222321/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142958143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Is it Genocide? : Gaza, Ukraine, and Other Crimes Against Humanity.","authors":"Paul James","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10411-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-024-10411-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the context of the current war, the question \"Is the Israeli state effecting genocide in Gaza?\" suggests a threshold legal excursus, a definitional contestation, or a cry of moral outrage. This article does not take any of those paths. It lives the pain of the unethical deaths of tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza, while beginning the longer-term task of seeking a way beyond deploying the concept of \"genocide\" as a performative gesture of shock and horror. The article argues that the meaning of genocide is being emptied out by an unsettling of the grounding conditions of political debate and the relativization of political language. While the evidence is strong that crimes against humanity are being perpetrated in Gaza, both by the Israeli state in its attack upon civilians and by Hamas in holding hostages, the provisional ruling by the International Court of Justice that there is a case to be answered is the most resolute that we can be at this point. Clearly, the war has to stop. In the meantime, the article suggests an alternative way of naming the horror.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"37-45"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12222336/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143525040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Re-imagining and Remembering in Gaza: A Response to Spivak's Humanities Beyond the Disciplines: Imaginative Activism.","authors":"Rachel Busbridge","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10399-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-024-10399-z","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Spivak's contribution to this symposium invites us to think beyond ethics in the abstract and instead to ground it in the \"epistemology of the subaltern,\" placing emphasis on a \"humanities-style education\" in thinking precisely from those margins in the interests of \"social justice for all.\" In my response to her essay, I take up her invitation to \"abstract up\" my reading of her intervention through the specifics of Gaza.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"81-83"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142512218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Organ Markets, Options, and an Over-Inclusiveness Objection: On Rippon's Argument.","authors":"J Damgaard Thaysen, J Sønderholm","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10363-x","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11673-024-10363-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Human organs available for transplant are in short supply. One way to increase the supply of organs consists in legalizing a live donor market. Such a market is, however, controversial. This article is about an objection to live donor organ markets made by Simon Rippon. Rippon's objection is that the presence of a market option creates new social and legal pressures that harm the poor. Legalizing the option of selling your organs transforms into a harmful, and morally indefensible, social, and legal pressure to sell on the financially desperate. This article defends the conclusion that Rippon's argument fails as an objection to live donor organ markets. It fails because it has implausibly expansive implications about which markets are morally problematic. In short, Rippon's argument proves too much. Sections one and two introduce Rippon's argument. Sections three and four contain the argument against Rippon. The main argumentative move is that the features of an organ market that, according to Rippon, justify a ban on such a market are features that also characterize several other markets that are normally considered unproblematic, for example, markets where individuals sell their labour abroad in jobs that are dangerous. So, if an organ market should be legally impermissible, so should these labour markets. Section five considers several objections to the argument against Rippon. It is argued that these objections fail. Section six is a conclusion that sums up the findings of the article.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"95-100"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12222411/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142114352","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}