{"title":"Reevaluating repugnance: a critical analysis of Leon Kass' writings on genetic reproductive technologies.","authors":"Michael Kimberly","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent philosophical and political discourse surrounding the issue of human cloning has dominated both public and academic arenas. With the dual potential to address human disease, distress, and disorder in unprecedented ways, and to offend a vast public uncomfortable with the technology, cloning represents a true political conundrum. Adulterated by the opinion of an uninformed public, the murky waters of public policy-making foster arguments like Leon Kass' \"Wisdom of Repugnance.\" Unfortunately, such appeals to repulsion do not fare as well in the academic arena. Kass proposes that society yield to repugnance as an ethically relevant factor, since the elicitation of such repugnance signifies the defilement of human nature. However, such an application of repulsion and offense to human nature leads to improbable conclusions and internal contradictions that soundly repudiate the acceptance of such a principle. Thus, rather than pre-analytically yielding to visceral emotions and passions, individual rational agents--and the public generally--ought to thoroughly analyze all of the relevant factors surrounding cloning before, and perhaps instead of, rejecting the technology simply because it elicits repugnance.</p>","PeriodicalId":82362,"journal":{"name":"Princeton journal of bioethics","volume":"5 ","pages":"8-24"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22392890","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":"Euthanasia: how proponents justify it and provide models for regulation.","authors":"Anhaita Daruwala","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Life prolonging advances in medicine have raised debate about the concept and clinical practice of euthanasia for terminally ill patients. This debate involves the need for protection of patients' rights in their delicate condition, while providing them with the right to end their own life, if they choose to do so. This paper addresses how proponents justify euthanasia in societies that have legalized it, while ensuring that patients asking for a merciful death do not get exploited by the system. Regulation models are thus adapted from the Dutch and Oregon medical systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":82362,"journal":{"name":"Princeton journal of bioethics","volume":"5 ","pages":"37-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22392894","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":"Intention, manner, and culpability in death.","authors":"Fareed Awan","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper criticizes the policy of the American Medical Association's policy on euthanasia. Contrary to a notable criticism of the AMA policy, this paper focuses not on the distinction between acts of commission and omission, but on the distinction between medical treatment aimed at ending life and medical treatment aimed at preserving an acceptable life for the patient.</p>","PeriodicalId":82362,"journal":{"name":"Princeton journal of bioethics","volume":"5 ","pages":"81-91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22392168","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":"Mental illness and the right to refuse lifesaving medical treatment.","authors":"Kathryn Lang","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The legal and ethical debate surrounding the right of mentally ill patients to refuse life saving medical treatment is one area in the spectrum of patient rights that the medical community has failed to fully explore. To better investigate this concept, it is important to first focus on the history of the right to refuse treatment for all patients. Case studies then explore arguments on both sides of the issue, and focus discussion on the inadequacies of the current standards, a need for further study and universal testing principles in order to provide all patients with the rights they deserve.</p>","PeriodicalId":82362,"journal":{"name":"Princeton journal of bioethics","volume":"5 ","pages":"48-58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22392164","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 ethics of cloning and human embryo research.","authors":"Madeleine Saran","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The successful cloning experiments that led to Dolly in 1997 have raised many ethical and policy questions. This paper will focus on cloning research in human embryonic cells. The possible gains of the research will be judged against the moral issues of doing research on a person. This paper concludes that while the embryo has some moral status, its moral status is outweighed by the multitude of benefits that embryonic stem cell research will bring to humanity. Policy suggestions are given for dealing with this new and developing field of stem cell research.</p>","PeriodicalId":82362,"journal":{"name":"Princeton journal of bioethics","volume":"5 ","pages":"25-36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22392893","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":"Biotechnology and the new politics of life and death in Brazil: the AIDS model.","authors":"Joao Biehl","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Brazilian government is providing free antiretroviral therapies to all of the country's registered AIDS cases, and this policy is being hailed as a model for treatment AIDS worldwide. My paper is an ethnographic investigation of this emergent biopolitical paradigm. I explore the forms of governance, civility, and humanness that emerge through this population whose rights are biotechnologically realized, and the mechanisms through which this model continues to not address the most vulnerable populations, leaving them \"invisible.\"</p>","PeriodicalId":82362,"journal":{"name":"Princeton journal of bioethics","volume":"5 ","pages":"59-74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22392166","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":"Reconstructing the stem cell debate.","authors":"Bradley J Sitko","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Human embryonic stem cells have been a major topic in science, medicine, and religion since their discovery in 1998. However, due to the complex discourse and rhetoric of scientific language, debate has remained within the professional realm via \"expert bioethics.\" Using the tenets of pragmatism, the author examines the need to move the debate to society as a whole and disentangle the stem cell debate from the ideologies of the human cloning and abortion debates. Opening this issue to a societal debate will advance societal growth, resulting in informed decisions on moral issues, funding, or regulation associated with hES cell research.</p>","PeriodicalId":82362,"journal":{"name":"Princeton journal of bioethics","volume":"5 ","pages":"92-104"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22392169","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":"Cost cutting: substandard care.","authors":"Katherin Peperzak","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mr. Edwards is diagnosed with a heart arrhythmia and is treated with a successful regimen of medication. He joins an HMO and begins care under a new doctor who ponders whether he should switch Mr. Edwards' medical regimen. Changing the treatment would save the HMO money that could be allocated among other patients, but would expose Mr. Edwards to a small risk of fatal heart attack. I argue that the doctor should not change the medication without the patient's considerations for the following reasons: doctors ought to work solely for the welfare of the patient, the patient has no obligation to cut HMO costs; and allowing doctors' treatment decisions to be influenced by third a party would have negative social repercussions. Furthermore, an informative doctor-patient relationship would be preferred over other \"relationship models\" for determining Mr. Edwards' course of medication.</p>","PeriodicalId":82362,"journal":{"name":"Princeton journal of bioethics","volume":"5 ","pages":"75-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22392167","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}