Gene patents and Lockean constraints.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biotechnology↗
Biomedical subjects
Kristin Shrader-Frechette
Publications and source records attributed to Kristin Shrader-Frechette.
Mortgaging the future: dumping ethics with nuclear waste.
On August 22, 2005 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued proposed new regulations for radiation releases from the planned permanent U.S. nuclear-waste repository in Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The goal of the new standards is to provide public-health protection for the next million years - even though everyone admits that the radioactive wastes will leak. Regulations now guarantee individual and equal protection against all radiation exposures above the legal limit. Instead E.P.A. recommended different radiation exposure-limits for different time periods. It also recommended using only the arithmetic mean of the dose distribution, to assess regulatory compliance during one time period, but using only the median dose to assess compliance during another period. This piece argues that these two changes - in exposure-limits and in methods of assessing regulatory compliance - have at least four disturbing consequences. The changes would threaten equal protection, ignore the needs of the most vulnerable, allow many fatal exposures, and sanction scientifically flawed dose calculations.
Ethics↗
Radiobiology and gray science: flaws in landmark new radiation protections.
The International Commission on Radiological Protection--whose regularly updated recommendations are routinely adopted as law throughout the globe--recently issued the first-ever ICRP protections for the environment. These draft 2005 proposals are significant both because they offer the commission's first radiation protections for any non-human parts of the planet and because they will influence both the quality of radiation risk assessment and environmental protection, as well as the global costs of nuclear-weapons cleanup, reactor decommissioning and radioactive waste management. This piece argues that the 2005 recommendations are scientifically and ethically flawed, or gray, in at least three respects: first, in largely ignoring scientific journals while employing mainly "gray literature;" second, in relying on non-transparent dose estimates and models, rather than on actual radiation measurements; and third, in ignoring classical ethical constraints on acceptable radiation risk.
Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation↗
Property rights and genetic engineering: developing nations at risk.
Eighty percent of (commercial) genetically engineered seeds (GES) are designed only to resist herbicides. Letting farmers use more chemicals, they cut labor costs. But developing nations say GES cause food shortages, unemployment, resistant weeds, and extinction of native cultivars when "volunteers" drift nearby. While GES patents are reasonable, this paper argues many patent policies are not. The paper surveys GE technology, outlines John Locke's classic account of property rights, and argues that current patent policies must be revised to take account of Lockean ethical constraints. After answering a key objection, it provides concrete suggestions for implementing its ethical conclusions.
Bioethics↗
Ethics and choosing appropriate means to an end: problems with coal mine and nuclear workplace safety.
A common problem in ethics is that people often desire an end but fail to take the means necessary to achieve it. Employers and employees may desire the safety end mandated by performance standards for pollution control, but they may fail to employ the means, specification standards, necessary to achieve this end. This article argues that current (de jure) performance standards, for lowering employee exposures to ionizing radiation, fail to promote de facto worker welfare, in part because employers and employees do not follow the necessary means (practices known as specification standards) to achieve the end (performance standards) of workplace safety. To support this conclusion, the article argues that (1) safety requires attention to specification, as well as performance, standards; (2) coal-mine specification standards may fail to promote performance standards; (3) nuclear workplace standards may do the same; (4) choosing appropriate means to the end of safety requires attention to the ways uncertainties and variations in exposure may mask violations of standards; and (5) correcting regulatory inattention to differences between de jure and de facto is necessary for achievement of ethical goals for safety.
Air Pollutants, Radioactive↗
Trading jobs for health: ionizing radiation, occupational ethics, and the welfare argument.
Blue-collar workers throughout the world generally face higher levels of pollution than the public and are unable to control many health risks that employers impose on them. Economists tend to justify these risky workplaces on the grounds of the compensating wage differential (CWD). The CWD, or hazard-pay premium, is the alleged increment in wages, all things being equal, that workers in hazardous environments receive. According to this theory, employees trade safety for money on the job market, even though they realize some of them will bear the health consequences of their employment in a risky occupational environment. To determine whether the CWD or hazard-pay premium succeeds in justifying alleged environmental injustices in the workplace, this essay (1) surveys the general theory behind the "compensating wage differential"; (2) presents and evaluates the "welfare argument" for the CWD; (3) offers several reasons for rejecting the CWD, as a proposed rationale for allowing apparent environmental injustice in the workplace; and (4) applies the welfare argument to an empirical case, that of US nuclear workers. The essay concludes that this argument fails to provide a justification for the apparent environmental injustice faced by the 600,000 US workers who have labored in government nuclear-weapons plants and laboratories.
Ethics, Professional↗
Ethical, logical and scientific problems with the new ICRP proposals.
Last year the ICRP proposed a new system of radiation protection designed to be simpler, more oriented toward individual protection and reflective of important ethical standards. This article argues that the proposal violates important norms of scientific simplicity, is in fact less protective of individuals than the current system and makes a number of ethical errors. After outlining 12 ethical errors, five logical errors and two scientific problems with the new ICRP proposal, the present authors suggest possible ways to remedy these deficiencies.
Ethical Analysis↗