Bioethics最新文献

{"title":"‘Bioethics: What? and why?’ : Revisited","authors":"Udo Schuklenk","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13391","DOIUrl":"10.1111/bioe.13391","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Ruth Chadwick and I have been editors-in-chief of the journal for the last 25 years. We have tried to steward it to the best of our ability, and we have aimed to keep it true to its founders’ mission. That means, first and foremost, <i>Bioethics</i> is a journal that publishes primarily philosophical bioethics content. This scope limitation has—over the years—given rise to criticism from various quarters that didn't see themselves represented in the pages of the journal. <i>Bioethics</i> never claimed to represent every activity that goes under the label ‘bioethics’.</p><p>I want to take the opportunity this Editorial affords me to address some of these criticisms.</p><p>Some members of the bioethics community have criticized this—as well as other—journal(s) for being ‘too quiet’ when it comes to shocking human rights abuses, as is currently the case in the Gaza war, Yemen, Ukraine, etc. And it is true, we have not issued editorials condemning the activities of the Israel army in Gaza, or Russia's attacks on civilian infrastructure in the Ukraine. Like you, I have strong personal views on these conflicts, but these views are not significantly informed by my bioethics expertise. There are specific bioethics issues within the context of these conflicts that are worth addressing, such as the professional obligations of healthcare professionals to enemy combatants, terrorists with and without inverted commas, military attacks on healthcare facilities suspected of being used as shields by a group in the conflict, to name but a few. However, who the guilty party is in terms of what caused the Gaza conflict is not a bioethics issue. Accordingly, it is not a topic that will be litigated in the journal. This doesn't mean that we don't have views on these issues—like you, we are not intransigent to human suffering and injustice—but we don't have views on these issues in our role as editors of this journal. There are other academic journals that have a specialist focus on the ethical issues raised by these sorts of conflicts. Colleagues wishing to publish content on these topics should consider submitting their content to these kinds of publications, where their articles will be reviewed by academic peers with the relevant subject expertise. My good intentions and strong personal convictions do not make me an expert on war.</p><p>Every now and then colleagues who are—rightly—concerned about our abuse of non-human animals, as well as our destruction of the environment, ask us to increase the scope of the journal to include such matters, too. As you will note from my own positioning, I concur with these colleagues that these issues are both extremely important, and also that they are—like the war and human rights issue—legitimate subjects of ethical inquiry. However, as far as human bioethics is concerned, they are clearly not within the scope of the journal that Kuhse and Singer envisaged. As it happens, and much like in the case of the topic I discussed ","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"39 2","pages":"161-162"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bioe.13391","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143025536","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":"Is germline genome-editing person-affecting or identity-affecting, and does it matter?","authors":"Andrew McGee,&nbsp;Sinead Prince","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13385","DOIUrl":"10.1111/bioe.13385","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Writers have debated whether germline genome-editing is person-affecting or identity-affecting. The difference is thought to be ethically relevant to whether we should choose genome-editing or choose preimplantation genetic diagnosis and embryo selection, when seeking to prevent or produce bad conditions (e.g., cystic fibrosis, or deafness) in the individuals who will grow from the embryo edited or selected. We consider the very recent views of three prominent bioethicists and philosophers who have grappled with this issue. We claim that both sides are right, but that the sense in which genome-editing is person-affecting is less important, morally, when the aim is to have healthy children. Since this is the predominant objective of engaging in embryo selection and genome-editing, and since there are certain risks, at least for now, with genome-editing, it remains better, morally, to engage in embryo selection than genome-editing.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"39 3","pages":"250-258"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143016938","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":"Arguments against a “general and permanent” ban on pediatric intersex surgery: A response to Clune-Taylor","authors":"Suzаnа Ignjаtоvić","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13392","DOIUrl":"10.1111/bioe.13392","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The paper offers a critical response to the proposed “dis/analogy” between the restriction of Jehovah's Witness parental right to refuse life-saving blood transfusions for their minor children and a “general” and “permanent” ban on “unnecessary” pediatric intersex surgery. The main argument of the analogy is “securing the patient's future autonomy.” Feinberg's theory of rights is used to demonstrate that the proposed analogy is untenable. A new category of developmental rights-in-trust is introduced to address specific needs of gender development in DSD situations. Both premises are disputed. First, it is shown that the case of overriding Jehovah's Witness parental rights is not based on securing the patient's future autonomy, but a simple dependency right in Feinberg's theory. Second, it is demonstrated that pediatric intersex surgery is not in the same situation in all morally relevant respects as the Jehovah's Witness case because it represents a special type of developmental right-in-trust. In conclusion, the arguments based on the proposed analogy do not justify a “general and permanent” on pediatric intersex surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"39 3","pages":"296-301"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142973409","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 Impairment Argument's Coup de Grâce.","authors":"Braylen Samuel","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13394","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13394","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>According to Hendricks Impairment Argument (IA), abortion is immoral because it impairs the fetus. Here, I argue it is not sufficient to show merely that abortion impairs, Hendricks must show that it harms the fetus. If the fetus is not numerically identical to the person it will become, then it isn't harmed by an abortion. But if the fetus is numerically identical to the person it will become, it is harmed by the deprivation of a future of value. However, taking this route ultimately undermines the novelty of the impairment argument.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142959283","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":"Bioethical challenges in postwar development aid: The Rwandan case study.","authors":"Łukasz Wiktor, Maria Damps, Grace Kansayisa, Szymon Pietrzak, Bartłomiej Osadnik","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13304","DOIUrl":"10.1111/bioe.13304","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article considers aspects of a development aid that provides medical support to strengthen pediatric orthopedics in Rwanda. We present part of the Afriquia foundation work, a nonprofit foundation from Poland involved in supporting the medical sector in Rwanda as a sign of global solidarity and the human right to health. The main foundation's activity is the treatment of orthopedic problems among Rwandan citizens. We present a case study of two children under the care of the Afiquia foundation. 11-year-old Seraphine treated due to the consequences of right tibia osteomyelitis and 11-year-old Lavi suffering from osteogenesis imperfecta. Both children were treated surgically in Poland due to Rwanda's lack of treatment possibilities. After the applied treatment, Seraphine walks correctly without crutches and can attend school and thrive among her peers. Lavi has not sustained any fragility fracture since the surgery in Poland. He is healthy and constantly ongoing his rehabilitation including gait training. The described cases initiated development aid in Rwanda, supplying hospitals with orthopedic implants and training medical staff. The growing number of humanitarian crises across the globe and the people affected requires increasing organizations involved in providing relief. The emphasis should be on global education, aiming to make the recipients reflect and prepare them to face humanitarian crises.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":"90-97"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140961065","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":"A defense of ectogenic abortion.","authors":"Shane Ward","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13389","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13389","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A popular argument for a right to ectogenic abortions appeals to a right to avoid the obligations associated with parenthood. A common objection to this argument questions whether there are any sufficiently great harms associated with parenthood to ground such a right. I propose a novel formulation of this argument that avoids these objections. I then defend it against important objections.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142886513","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":"Medical test and employee's autonomy. Confidentiality of data and non-discrimination.","authors":"Javier Fernández-Costales Muñiz","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13384","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13384","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Monitoring health is one of the basic principles of Occupational Health and Safety. The main objective of this monitoring will be the detection of possible damage to health arising from work. They try to discover the effects that the inherent risks with the work may cause the worker, which will show, given the case, through an alteration of health or the state of organic and functional state, both physically and mentally. Regarding the monitoring of health, there are many and varied issues to be raised concerning the right to personal privacy. Thus, notably, whether there was effective consensus, and whether, in particular, the object and the purpose of the medical examination meant a disregard of the statutory scheme, an excess or even a failure to comply with the terms of the Spanish Constitution. The limits imposed by the law makers to the productive unit will play a key role in identifying the content of the company obligation to monitor health, being in many cases guarantees of constitutional rights. Therefore, the methods of health monitoring and control of workers will always be carried out respecting the privacy and dignity of the worker as well as the confidentiality of all information related to their health.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142873439","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":"Bioethics challenges in times of war","authors":"Julian W. März,&nbsp;Daniel Messelken,&nbsp;Nikola Biller-Andorno","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13383","DOIUrl":"10.1111/bioe.13383","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;According to data from the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP), the past 3 years have witnessed the highest number of deaths in armed conflicts since 1994, the year of the Rwandan genocide. Between 2021 and 2023, the UCDP recorded more than 700,000 deaths in armed conflicts, with over 320,000 in Ethiopia, more than 160,000 in Ukraine, over 44,000 in Mexico, more than 40,000 in Afghanistan, and over 32,000 in Syria.2 The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimates that more than 120 million people worldwide have been forcibly displaced by the end of April 2024.3&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This special issue seeks to provide a broad perspective on the ethical and human rights challenges faced by healthcare providers and policymakers in the context of, or as a consequence of, armed conflict. Since we launched the first call for contributions to this special issue in June 2022, sadly, more armed conflicts have started, including the Israel–Hamas and Israel–Hezbollah wars,4 a civil war in Sudan, and a new escalation of the Nagorno–Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;For this special issue, we have selected contributions that provide theoretical reflections on (bio-)ethical and human rights challenges in the context of war, as well as discussions of ethical and human rights issues in specific armed conflicts. We have aimed to achieve a collection of diverse voices and perspectives and to include contributions from various world regions and different academic and professional backgrounds. Our special issue does not aim to provide a definitive or comprehensive analysis of currently occurring armed conflicts, nor does it claim to cover all ethical and human rights issues in the context of armed conflicts. Such ambitious objectives would be beyond the scope of even a much more substantial publication. Rather, we view this special issue as an explorative work that intends to motivate a broader academic community to engage with the field of bioethics in armed conflict. Indeed, there is great need for a plurality of voices united in the endeavor of contributing to an inclusive global discourse on the ethical and human rights challenges of armed conflicts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ethics and human rights can fulfill various roles in the context of armed conflicts: analyst, arbiter, mediator, documenter, and a voice for those suffering from the consequences. In all these functions, empathy as well as evidence-based, transparent reasoning play a key role. Furthermore, ethical analysis contributes to the formulation of novel standards of international humanitarian law, which may be required in response to evolving practices in warfare. It is also pertinent to note that, according to the Geneva Conventions, medical personnel operating in the context of international armed conflicts are bound by the principles of medical ethics. Nevertheless, research on medical ethics in armed conflict remains a niche subject, with only a few specialized research centers around the wo","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"39 1","pages":"3-4"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bioe.13383","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142857082","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":"Sex and the planet: What opt-in reproduction could do for the globe By \u0000 Battin, Margaret Pabst, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 2024. pp. 264. $35.00 (Paperback). ISBN 9780262547987","authors":"Travis Rebello","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13390","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13390","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"39 3","pages":"302-303"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143423872","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 ability to value: An additional criterion for decision-making capacity","authors":"Lauren Harcarik,&nbsp;Scott Y. H. Kim,&nbsp;Joseph Millum","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13387","DOIUrl":"10.1111/bioe.13387","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In the United States, the dominant model of decision-making capacity (DMC) is the “four abilities model,” which judges DMC according to four criteria: understanding, appreciation, reasoning, and communicating a choice. Some critics argue that this model is “too cognitive” because it ignores the role of emotions and values in decision-making. But so far there is no consensus about how to incorporate such factors into a model of DMC while still ensuring that patients with unusual or socially disapproved values still have their autonomous decisions respected. In this paper, we aim to give an account of the role of values in decision-making which can answer some of the lingering questions about capacity. In the current literature, defenders of the inclusion of values in DMC tend to propose solutions which focus on the distorted or incoherent attributes of the values themselves. We argue that shifting the focus onto valuing as an ability is a better solution and that a complete picture of capacity includes understanding, appreciation, reasoning, communicating a choice, <i>and</i> the ability to value. On the basis of a conceptual analysis of the necessary conditions for autonomous decision-making, we derive a conception of the ability to value. On our account, the ability to value has four components: the possession of values, the ability to access those values, the ability to engage in practical reasoning with one's values, and the ability to act on the result of that reasoning. We describe the positive components of the ability to value, some indicators of impairment, and some implications of our account.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"39 3","pages":"288-295"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bioe.13387","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142840221","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}