PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Bioethics”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources

Teaching bioethics to medical students: the Newcastle experience.

Over the past two decades in the USA, bioethics has become an accepted component of medical education, whereas in Australia, 10 years or even less would encompass the history of most existing programmes. Given the legendary conservatism of medical schools in Australia and the intractability of the medical curriculum, this is still a remarkable achievement. But does the teaching of bioethics change the thinking and/or decision-making behaviour of medical students or practitioners exposed to such courses? Those involved know only too well how difficult such courses are to design and evaluate since the connection between ethics education and practice is not known and may never be demonstrated to the satisfaction of critics. Critics not only seek answers to the questions of whether the teaching of bioethics makes a difference, which is a fair question, but they also seek answers to the question of whether bioethics should be taught in medical schools. Can bioethics be taught? Whose bioethics is being taught? What does the trained bioethicist contribute? Some of these questions arise from misunderstanding and some reflect the still too dominant view in medical schools which divides disciplines into those which provide 'practical skills', and those which contribute only theoretical and therefore peripheral knowledge. The authors will address these questions in the light of their experience at Newcastle, Australia, where the Faculty of Medicine has been teaching bioethics for over a decade.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

Empirical research in bioethical journals. A quantitative analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this research is to analyse the evolution and nature of published empirical research in the fields of medical ethics and bioethics. DESIGN: Retrospective quantitative study of nine peer reviewed journals in the field of bioethics and medical ethics (Bioethics, Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Hastings Center Report, Journal of Clinical Ethics, Journal of Medical Ethics, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, Nursing Ethics, Christian Bioethics, and Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics). RESULTS: In total, 4029 articles published between 1990 and 2003 were retrieved from the journals studied. Over this period, 435 (10.8%) studies used an empirical design. The highest percentage of empirical research articles appeared in Nursing Ethics (n = 145, 39.5%), followed by the Journal of Medical Ethics (n = 128, 16.8%) and the Journal of Clinical Ethics (n = 93, 15.4%). These three journals account for 84.1% of all empirical research in bioethics published in this period. The results of the chi2 test for two independent samples for the entire dataset indicate that the period 1997-2003 presented a higher number of empirical studies (n = 309) than did the period 1990-1996 (n = 126). This increase is statistically significant (chi2 = 49.0264, p < .0001). Most empirical studies employed a quantitative paradigm (64.6%, n = 281). The main topic of research was prolongation of life and euthanasia (n = 68). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the proportion of empirical research in the nine journals increased steadily from 5.4% in 1990 to 15.4% in 2003. It is likely that the importance of empirical methods in medical ethics and bioethics will continue to increase.

Bioethics↗

Bioethics and history.

Standard bioethics textbooks present the field to students and non-experts as a form of "applied ethics." This ahistoric and rationalistic presentation is similar to that used in philosophy of science textbooks until three decades ago. Thomas Kuhn famously critiqued this self-conception of the philosophy of science, persuading the field that it would become deeper, richer, and more philosophical, if it integrated the history of science, especially the history of scientific change, into its self-conception. This essay urges a similar reconceptualization for bioethics, arguing that the analysis of moral change ought to be integral to bioethics (and to ethics generally). It proceeds by suggesting the sterility of the ahistoric, rationalist applied ethics model of bioethics embraced by standard bioethics textbooks. It also suggests the fecundity of alternative conceptions of the bioethics that focus on the history of successful and failed attempts to negotiate moral change, and the history of multifaceted relations between moral philosophy and practical ethics.

Abortion, Legal↗

Bioethics in Ibero-America and the Caribbean.

Bioethics has become a field of new challenges for Ibero-America and the Caribbean. A seeming uniformity in the region hides a rich heterogeneous society. A brief survey of bioethical developments in different Ibero-American countries is provided as well as the bioethical problems and approaches peculiar to the region. Some of the unique features of bioethics in this region, it is suggested, could infuse new life into the U.S. and European bioethics discussion. Finally, a bibliography of Ibero-American bioethics literature is provided for North American and European readers.

Bioethical Issues↗

Breast cancer in two regimes: the impact of social movements on illness experience.

This article uses the narrative of one woman, Clara Larson, to explore changes over time in the experiences of illness available to women diagnosed with breast cancer. To claim that different illness experiences become available at different times is simply to acknowledge that experiences of disease are shaped not only by the individual circumstances of disease sufferers and the particular character of their pathologies, but by culturally, spatially and historically specific regimes of practices. This article explores the impact of social movements on the regime of breast cancer and makes four contributions to the scholarship on illness experience. First, it offers the concept disease regime as a way of conceptualising the structural shaping of illness experience. Second, it demonstrates the value of incorporating social movements more thoroughly into the study of illness experience. Third, it proposes that social movements change illness experiences in two ways: (1) by changing the sufferer or her relationship to the regime's practices; and (2) by changing and expanding the regime's actual practices. And fourth, it demonstrates how gender and sexuality are constituted within disease regimes and are challenged by social movements. This article is informed by four years of ethnographic research conducted in the San Francisco Bay Area between 1994 and 1998, supplemented by historical research and more than 40 taped interviews and oral histories with current and former breast cancer patients, activists, educators, scientists, support group leaders and volunteers.

Breast Neoplasms↗

Bioethics and the marginalization of mental illness.

This paper explores why ethical issues associated with mental illness have been generally neglected in the literature and texts of the discipline of bioethics. I argue that the reasons for this are both philosophical and structural, involving the philosophical framework of principlism in bioethics, in particular the privileging of the principle of autonomy, and the institutional location and disciplinary boundaries of bioethics as a profession. Other contributing factors include developments outside of bioethics, in medicine and law and in the delivery patterns and funding sources of mental health services, and above all the pervasive stigma that attaches to mental illness. My goal is to show both how the attention bioethics could bring would benefit this neglected area of health care, and why attending to the issues surrounding mental illness would benefit bioethics in meeting its professional obligations as the public voice on matters of ethical significance in health care.

Behavior Control↗

Bioethics in Russia.

Ten years of development in Russian bioethics presents significant progress. At the beginning of the 90s bioethics was practically unknown for Russian medical doctors, philosophers and the public. Since the year 2000 bioethics has become an obligatory course for all medical students. The Russian Orthodox Church published the same year "The Social Doctrine" that included a special part "The Church and Problems of Bioethics." Different bioethical problems are often discussed in the mass media. The development of Russian bioethics proves the basic understanding of ethics presented by John Dewey--ethics is a function of the moral life of the community. Norms are good or bad mostly as instruments that could be used in everyday life to solve real problems people meet.

Bioethical Issues↗

A nursing bioethics program.

In 1985 the Seattle Veterans' Administration Medical Center nursing service implemented a nursing program for bioethics with three goals: (1) to expand the nurse's knowledge of bioethical principles, (2) to develop the nurse's ability and confidence in analyzing bioethical dilemmas, and (3) to increase bioethical application at the bedside. Two psychosocial clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) led this highly successful nursing program that prepared nurses to more actively and responsibly participate in bioethical decision making within the medical center. The program offers an annual workshop for new members, holds a monthly discussion group, conducts a yearly enrichment program, and completes an annual evaluation report. This article describes nursing service bioethics program from planning through evaluation and the role of the CNS as program coordinator, facilitator, and educator in the expanding field of bioethics.

Education, Nursing, Continuing↗

Accounting for context: future directions in bioethics theory and research.

Many physicians have found that the traditional approach to bioethics fails to account for important aspects of their moral experience in practice. New approaches to bioethics theory are challenging the traditional application of universal moral principles based in liberal moral theory. At the same time, a shift in both the goals and methods of bioethics education has accompanied its "coming of age" in the medical school curriculum. Taken together, these changes challenge both bioethics educators and theorists to come closer to the details and nuances of real clinical encounters. The emerging trend emphasizes the importance of context in bioethics education and in the moral theory and research undergirding it. This article introduces one research approach examining the practical life contexts of medical students' ethical experiences and learning. It calls for increased attention to research and theory in bioethics that more adequately accounts for the ways different contexts produce significant changes in meaning and understanding in medical encounters.

Bioethics↗

Bioethics and rural health: theorizing place, space, and subjects.

The field of bioethics has been criticized for its universalizing tendencies, attributed in a large part to its foundations in moral philosophy and the level of abstraction of much bioethical discourse. Efforts to particularize bioethics have included the "turn toward casuistry", the emergence of feminist and disability rights critiques of mainstream bioethics, and ethnographic contributions that examine the situatedness of ethical acts, practices, and meanings in local contexts. Such work introduces into bioethics dimensions of space, place, and time; nonetheless, these remain relatively unexplored as constitutive elements and/or influences of the phenomena of ethics discourse and ethics-related practices. Drawing from an ethnographic study of genetics in rural health, this paper presents a sociological discussion of space/time and bioethics through examination of rural health settings. Issues raised include intersections of spatial and power relations, socio-spatial gradients of expertise, and socio-spatial dimensions of ethics knowledge and practices within medical settings.

Bioethics↗

The ecumenical and non-ecumenical dialectic of Christian bioethics.

Non-ecumenical Christian bioethics will seem a strange category for many. The category relies on the recognition that bioethics mediates morality and ethics in healthcare. As such bioethics will have particular content. It is the content of a moral vision that both divides and unites. The enterprise of non-ecumenical Christian bioethics explores how Christians are both divided and united on the issue of bioethics. Non-ecumenical Christian bioethics is opposed to a facile ecumenism that reduces the content of Christian morality to the lowest common denominator.

Bioethics↗

Policy arguments in a public church: Catholic social ethics and bioethics.

This paper is an analysis of the relationship of social ethics and bioethics in Roman Catholic theology. The argument of the paper is that the character of both Catholic moral theology and ecclesiology shape the broadly defined interest of the church in bioethics. The paper examines the common elements of social ethics and bioethics in Catholic teaching, describes how ecclesiology shapes Catholic public policy and uses the examples of abortion and health care to illustrate the relationship of Catholic social thought and bioethics. In developing the relationship of these two dimensions of Catholic moral argument the article highlights how the appeal to natural law categories differs in social ethics and bioethics and how the two topics are received differently in the theological community. It also seeks to illustrate how the premises of Catholic social ethics remain central to public positions taken on bioethics.

Abortion, Induced↗

Critical bioethics: beyond the social science critique of applied ethics.

This article attempts to show a way in which social science research can contribute in a meaningful and equitable way to philosophical bioethics. It builds on the social science critique of bioethics present in the work of authors such as Renee Fox, Barry Hoffmaster and Charles Bosk, proposing the characteristics of a critical bioethics that would take social science seriously. The social science critique claims that traditional philosophical bioethics gives a dominant role to idealised, rational thought, and tends to exclude social and cultural factors, relegating them to the status of irrelevancies. Another problem is they way in which bioethics assumes social reality divides down the same lines/categories as philosophical theories. Critical bioethics requires bioethicists to root their enquiries in empirical research, to challenge theories using evidence, to be reflexive and to be sceptical about the claims of other bioethicists, scientists and clinicians. The aim is to produce a rigorous normative analysis of lived moral experience.

Bioethics↗

Bioethics as a scientific enterprise.

The authors of this article attempt to look at the manner in which the field of bioethics has emerged to represent an entirely new science. The article does this by first looking at various developments in the field of medicine and science. Specifically, the authors point to the developments in pharmacology, biology, and in genetics, as the stimuli for the field of bioethics. Since these three fields of study directly deal with human beings and their respective environment, new developments in these respective areas of science have questioned what society has traditionally held concerning these two concepts. In an effort to help answer such questions, the field of bioethics has emerged. The authors argue that bioethics represents more than just a theoretical field. Instead, bioethics, as an entirely new science in itself, has the ability to provide answers to the question, and moral dilemmas that new developments in other sciences raise. The article attempts to show that science/medicine has direct links to proper therapy and procedures. The authors do this by making a direct connection between ethics and medicine, as Hippocrates understood. For Hippocrates, medicine and science should be distinguished from religion, but not from proper ethos. Therefore, the authors argue that the field of bioethics has gained its status as a scientific enterprise since it provides the ability for scientists and physicians to conduct their work in an ethos that aims to protect the human person.

Bioethics↗

The plurality of Chinese and American medical moralities: toward an interpretive cross-cultural bioethics.

Since the late 1970s, American appraisals of Chinese medical ethics and Chinese responses to American bioethics range from frank criticism to warm appreciation, from refutation to acceptance. Yet in the United States as well as in China, American bioethics and Chinese medical ethics have been seen, respectively, as individualistic and communitarian. In this widely-accepted general comparison, the great variation in the two medical moralities, especially the diversity of Chinese experiences, has been unfortunately minimized, if not totally ignored. Neither American bioethics nor Chinese medical ethics is a field with only one dominant way of thinking. Medical moralities in America and China -- traditional and modern -- have always been plural and diverse. For example, American and Chinese cultures and medical moralities both exhibit individualistic and communitarian traditions. For this reason, bioethics in general and cross-cultural bioethics in particular must be fundamentally interpretive. Interpretive cross-cultural bioethics appreciates the plurality of medical morality within any culture. It can serve as a vital means of social and cultural criticism through engaged interpretations.

Attitude↗

Promises and perils of public deliberation: contrasting two national bioethics commissions on embryonic stem cell research.

National bioethics commissions have struggled to develop ethically warranted methods for conducting their deliberations. The National Bioethics Advisory Commission in its report on stem cell research adopted an approach to public deliberation indebted to Rawls in that it sought common ground consistent with shared values and beliefs at the foundation of a well-ordered democracy. In contrast, although the research cloning and stem cell reports of the President's Council on Bioethics reveal that it broached two different methods of public deliberation--balancing goods and following an overarching moral principle--it adopted neither. Thereupon its primer mover, Leon Kass, influenced particularly by the approach of Leo Strauss, sought to develop a method of public deliberation guided by tradition and practical wisdom. When this failed, the Council fell back on a method that took account of shared fundamental values of a free democracy--a method remarkable akin to that employed by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Respect for diverse reasonable conceptions of the good in a democratic polity requires national bioethics commissions to seek and incorporate that which is valuable in opposing positions.

Advisory Committees↗

Teaching global bioethics.

We live in a world with enormous disparities in health. The life expectancy in Japan is 80 years; in Malawi, 40 years. The under-five mortality in Norway is 4/1000; in Sierra Leone, 316/1000. The situation is actually worse than these figures suggest because average rates tend to mask inequalities within a country. Several presidents of the IAB have urged bioethicists to attend to global disparities and to broaden the scope of bioethics. For the last six years I have tried to do just that. In this paper, I report and reflect on my attempts to teach bioethics in ways that address global health and justice. I then discuss ways to address key ethical issues in global health: the problem of inequalities; the nature of the duty to assist; the importance of the duty not to harm; the difference between a cosmopolitan and a political view of justice. I also discuss how teaching about global health may help to shift the emphasis in bioethics--from sensational cases to everyday matters, from autonomy and justice, and from access to healthcare to the social determinants of health. At the end of my paper, I reflect on questions that I have not resolved: how to delineate the scope of bioethics, whether my approach over-politicises bioethics, and how to understand the responsibilities of bioethicists.

Bioethical Issues↗

Respecting difference and moving beyond regulation: tasks for U.S. bioethics commissions in the twenty-first century.

This article focuses on two possible missions for a national bioethics commission. The first is handling differences of worldview, political orientation, and discipline. Recent work in political philosophy emphasizes regard for the dignity of difference manifested in "conversation" that seeks understanding rather than agreement. The President's Council on Bioethics gets a mixed review in this area. The second is experimenting with prophetic bioethics. "Prophetic bioethics" is a term coined by Daniel Callahan to describe an alternative to compromise-seeking "regulatory bioethics." It involves a critique of modern medicine. In the contemporary context, the areas of biotechnology and access to health care cry out for prophetic attention. The Council has addressed biotechnology; unfortunately, that experience suggests that the kind of prophecy that it practices poses risks to conversation. With regard to access issues, the article proposes an effort that unites themes of human dignity, solidarity, and limits in support of reform, while highlighting, rather than papering over, differences.

Advisory Committees↗