Bioethics最新文献

{"title":"A Bioethical Assessment of the Environmental Impacts of War.","authors":"Funda Gülay Kadioglu","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13431","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13431","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144144403","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Biobank Diversity and the Perils of Race Essentialism.","authors":"Akshay Pendyal","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13435","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13435","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144013846","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Artificial Intelligence: The New Transplant Selection Committee Member.","authors":"Frank G Lee, Christopher H Kim, Tayyab S Diwan","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13430","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13430","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144058125","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Autonomous Neurosurgical Robots: Ethical Concerns in Informed Consent and Global Health Equity.","authors":"Carlos M Adila","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13429","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13429","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144053398","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Patient autonomy and new technological advances in medicine","authors":"Marina Morla-González","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13426","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The rapid advancement of technology in medicine presents new and complex ethical challenges. This special issue of Bioethics is dedicated to exploring the intersection between patient autonomy and emerging medical technologies. From artificial intelligence to digital medication, robotic care, and reproductive biotechnologies, the contributions in this issue delve into how these innovations reshape ethical considerations in healthcare.</p><p>Patient autonomy is a cornerstone of medical ethics, ensuring that individuals retain the right to make informed decisions about their own healthcare. However, technological progress often introduces tensions between autonomy, beneficence, justice, and privacy. The articles in this issue address these tensions by analyzing the risks and benefits of new technologies, assessing regulatory gaps, and proposing ethical frameworks to navigate these changes.</p><p>One of the most pressing issues explored is the development of autonomous neurosurgical robots (ANRs). While these robots promise increased surgical precision and reduced complications, they also raise concerns about the erosion of human surgical skills, legal uncertainty, and unforeseen patient risks. The ethical dilemma lies in whether society should embrace ANRs despite these potential drawbacks, and if so, how to ensure transparency and accountability in their implementation.</p><p>Similarly, the increasing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare, as examined in this issue, highlights the risks of bias in AI health systems. While AI has the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and treatment efficiency, biases in algorithmic decision-making could result in discriminatory healthcare outcomes. The current regulatory landscape in Europe may not sufficiently mitigate these risks, prompting a discussion on alternative policies to ensure fairness and accountability.</p><p>Another critical area of concern is the use of digital medication and mobile health technologies. While digital pills and mobile health tools claim to empower patients by providing greater control over their treatments, they also introduce risks related to privacy, data security, and potential paternalism. This issue presents a nuanced discussion on how such technologies might inadvertently undermine shared decision-making and the doctor–patient relationship.</p><p>Ethical tensions also arise in the implementation of assistive robots for elderly care. While robots like ROB-IN offer support for older adults, their use raises questions about privacy, autonomy, and the risk of ageism. This issue explores the balance between providing technological assistance and ensuring that these innovations do not infringe upon the dignity and independence of aged individuals.</p><p>Reproductive autonomy is another key theme, particularly in the context of reprogenetic technologies and digital contraception for women with disabilities. The evolution of reproductive technologies has led to sh","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"39 5","pages":"403"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bioe.13426","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143909203","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Selective Deployment of AI in Healthcare and the Problem of Declining Human Expertise.","authors":"Marie Kerguelen Feldblyum Le Blevennec","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13424","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13424","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Machine-learning algorithms are transforming healthcare diagnostics and prognostics. However, they sometimes underperform for groups underrepresented in their training data. Vandersluis and Savulescu have suggested selectively deploying these algorithms for populations well represented in the training data, while excluding underrepresented groups until improvements are made to the algorithms. In this paper, I explore one long-term risk of such selective deployment for certain small underrepresented groups, such as those with rare diseases. The risk in question is the potential long-term decline in the human expertise critical for such small groups, which, because they are excluded from effective care by the algorithm, would still rely on non-algorithmic, human expertise even in the long run. I then discuss how to best preserve human expertise and maintain long-term access to quality care for excluded groups and contend that such expertise preservation is essential for ethical deployment of algorithmic processes in healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144023127","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Abortion and Imminent Personhood.","authors":"Joel Cox","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13423","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13423","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Few debates conjure the angst, emotion, and conviction of the debate surrounding abortion and for good reason. The debate brings to the forefront multiple competing goods, including autonomy and respect for life, while affecting individual lives, the law, and politics in complex ways. Within this discussion, one of the preeminent issues is the status of the fetus: Is the fetus an actualized person or merely a potential person? While this question appears to lie at the heart of the conversation, it is based on a misguided view about the nature of the fetus. In this paper, I attempt to clarify the status of the fetus to hopefully re-situate this debate in a more helpful place. I am arguing that a fetus is an imminent person rather than a potential person and that imminent entities have a special moral standing greater than that of potential entities. To make this argument, I first provide background on different views about the metaphysical and moral status of fetuses to provide context for the view that I espouse. Then, I define and argue for the concept of imminence, explaining how it is different from potentiality and grants a greater moral standing to fetuses. Finally, I respond to objections, including arguments concerning whether imminence is a stage of existence, whether the fetus can be both an imminent and a potential person, and whether the personhood of the fetus matters to the debate around abortion.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144046594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Concerns Regarding Methodology and Interpretation in \"Analysis of Scientific Publications on the Gaza-Israeli Conflict\".","authors":"Abdullah Ghali, Yahya Shaikh, Ali Elaydi, Bilal Irfan, Tahir Sohaib Qasim, Khaled Saleh","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13425","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13425","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144006772","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"On Religious Influence in Bioethics: The Limits of Pluriversalism.","authors":"Giovanni Spitale, Federico Germani, Brian D Earp, Sebastian Porsdam Mann, Maide Barış, Marco Annoni, Kiarash Aramesh, Zohar Lederman, Calvin W L Ho, Karel Caals, Ambra D'Imperio, Marcello Ienca, Shenuka Singh, Debora Spagnolo, Nikola Biller-Andorno","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13419","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The World Congress of Bioethics held in Qatar in 2024 (WCB 2024) sparked controversy around the role of religion in bioethics, highlighting the need for critical discussions. During the congress, there was a strong push for incorporating religious values into bioethical discourse, raising questions about the validity and implications of such an approach. This paper examines the influence of religious thought on bioethical discussions, and the ongoing debate over the role of religious perspectives in this field. Here, we explore Jecker and colleagues' pluriversal framework, which was proposed at WCB 2024, espousing a bioethical discourse grounded in civility, respect for law, justice, non-domination, and toleration. While the framework aims to embrace the world's cultural and religious diversity, here, we suggest that it struggles with significant ethical inconsistencies, poses challenges for pluralistic dialogue, and may be hard to reconcile with human rights. Through an analysis of Jecker's principles and their application, we discuss the difficulty of integrating conflicting religious views with ethical values and with widely accepted human rights frameworks. We then proceed to examine how and why religions might exert undue influence on bioethics, and we argue for a different future for bioethics.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144063286","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Ethics of Heart Donation After the Circulatory Determination of Death: Gaps in Knowledge and Research Opportunities.","authors":"Anne L Dalle Ave, David Rodríguez-Arias, Kathleen N Fenton, James L Bernat, Daniel P Sulmasy","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13421","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13421","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 2023, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) organized a workshop to identify research gap areas in organ donation after circulatory determination of death (DCDD). We present the findings of the DCDD ethics working group. Heart DCDD, as all DCDD, may disrupt optimal end-of-life care. Irrespective of organ donation, research opportunities include identifying which processes of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy offer optimum patient comfort, how best to ensure patient comfort at the end of life, and how to better understand patients' preferences for end-of-life care. Whether heart DCDD breaches the Dead Donor Rule (DDR) depends on its interpretation, the validity and rationale of the determination of death, and the DCDD protocol used. Further research could clarify the interpretation of the DDR, the concept and determination of death, the time the cessation of brain function ensures that the patient is beyond neuro-cognitive harm, the implications of thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion on the determination of death and on brain functions, and the type of consent and level of information required for different DCDD techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144013847","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}