PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Carson Strong

Publications and source records attributed to Carson Strong.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Preembryo Personhood: an assessment of the President's Council arguments.

The President's Council on Bioethics has addressed the moral status of human preembryos in its reports on stem cell research and human therapeutic cloning. Although the Council has been criticized for being hand-picked to favor the right-to-life viewpoint concerning human preembryos, it has embraced the idea that the right-to-life position should be defended in secular terms. This is an important feature of the Council's work, and it demonstrates a recognition of the need for genuine engagement between opposing sides in the debate over stem cell research. To promote this engagement, the Council has stated in secular terms several arguments for the personhood of human preembryos. This essay presents and critiques those arguments, and it concludes that they are unsuccessful. If the best arguments in support of the personhood of human preembryos have been presented by the Council, then there are no reasonable secular arguments in support of that view.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed2006

Gert's moral theory and its application to bioethics cases.

Bernard Gert's theory of morality has received much critical attention, but there has been relatively little commentary on its practical value for bioethics. An important test of an ethical theory is its ability to yield results that are helpful and plausible when applied to real cases. An examination of Gert's theory and his own attempts to apply it to bioethics cases reveals that there are serious difficulties with regard to its application. These problems are sufficiently severe to support the conclusion that Gert's theory is unacceptable as an approach for resolving bioethics cases, even relatively noncontroversial cases.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed2006

Continuing the dialogue: a reply to Bernard Gert.

Continuing the dialogue begun in the March 2006 issue of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, I suggest that Bernard Gert's response to my paper does not adequately address the criticisms I make of his theory's application to bioethics cases.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed2005

The ethics of human reproductive cloning.

This article addresses the question of whether human reproductive cloning could be ethically justifiable in at least some cases involving infertile couples who would choose cloning as a way to have a genetically related child. At present, the risk of congenital anomalies constitutes a compelling argument against human reproductive cloning. The article explores whether reproductive cloning could be ethically justifiable if, at some future time, cloning becomes possible without an elevated risk of anomalies. It is argued that freedom to use cloning is a form of procreative freedom and, as such, deserves respect. All of the objections that have been raised against human reproductive cloning fall under three main categories: those that appeal to the interests of the child, those based on consequences for society, and those arising from teleological views. Objections that appeal to the child's interests are, in turn, of two main kinds: consequentialist and deontological. All of these types of objections are examined, and it is found that each involves serious problems that prevent it from being a reasonable objection in the context of the infertility cases considered. It is concluded that human reproductive cloning would be ethically justifiable in at least some cases involving infertile couples, provided that it could be performed without an elevated risk of anomalies.

Child↗
PubMed2005

Harming by conceiving: a review of misconceptions and a new analysis.

An objection often is raised against the use of reproductive technology to create "nontraditional families," as in ovum donation for postmenopausal women or postmortem artificial insemination. The objection states that conceiving children in such circumstances is harmful to them because of adverse features of these nontraditional families. A similar objection is raised when parents, through negligence or willful disregard of risks, create children with serious genetic diseases or other developmental handicaps. It is claimed that such reproduction harms the children who are created. In reply to this Harm to the Child Argument, it has been pointed out that the procreative acts that supposedly harm the child are the very acts that create the child. This reply has been developed into an argument that, in most of the types of cases under consideration, creating the child does not harm her. This reply, the No Harm Argument, has been stated in three main ways, and it is one of the most misunderstood arguments in bioethics. This paper examines the main rebuttals that have been made to the No Harm Argument and argues that none of them is successful.

Ethical Theory↗
PubMed2003

Fetal anomalies: ethical and legal considerations in screening, detection, and management.

A number of ethical considerations arise with regard to screening for, detecting, and managing fetal anomalies. Some of these considerations involve the need to give attention to emotional distress the pregnant woman might be experiencing. The ethical principle of beneficence gives rise to a duty of the obstetrician to provide emotional support when needed in relation to screening, confirmatory testing, giving bad news, making abortion decisions, making management decisions after viability, and dealing with the grieving process. Other issues involve ethical decision-making, such as deciding what recommendations to make concerning management of fetal anomalies after viability. The ethical principle of autonomy creates a duty of the obstetrician to help the pregnant woman make informed management decisions based on her values and goals. A recommendation for a particular approach to management is sometimes ethically justifiable on the basis of an analysis of the risks and benefits to the mother and fetus. Legal considerations are relevant because they create requirements or prohibitions that must be taken into account in ethical decision-making. The discussion in this article does not exhaust the range of issues that arise. For example, sometimes a delivery procedure is considered that is traumatic to the fetus, such as cephalocentesis for vaginal delivery of a fetus with hydrocephaly. The reader is referred to other sources for a discussion of the ethics of delivery procedures that might injure or kill the fetus. Other issues involve deciding when there is a duty to offer new prenatal genetic tests, routinely or for high-risk couples, and whether to carry out maternal requests for prenatal tests for late-onset diseases and susceptibilities to diseases. These issues have been discussed elsewhere.

Abortion, Eugenic↗
PubMed1997

Response to Khushf.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Beginning of Human Life↗