Bioethics

src: mbchb.med.cuhk.edu.hk

Bioethics is the study of ethical issues arising from advances in biology and medicine. It is also a moral affirmation relating to medical policies and practice. Bioethics is concerned with the ethical questions that arise in the relationship between life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics, law, and philosophy. This includes the study of values ​​("ordinary ethics") relating to primary care and other branches of medicine.

Video Bioethics

Etimologi

The term Bioethic (Greek bios , life, ethos , behavior) was created in 1926 by Fritz Jahr in an article on "bioethics necessity" animals and plants in scientific research. In 1970, American biochemist Van Rensselaer Potter used the term to describe the relationship between the biosphere and the growing human population. Potter's work lays the foundation for global ethics, a discipline centered around the relationship between biology, ecology, medicine, and human values.

Maps Bioethics

Destination and scope

The field of bioethics has addressed various human investigations, ranging from debates over life's limits (eg abortion, euthanasia), surrogacy, allocation of scarce health care resources (eg organ donation, health care rationing) to the right to refuse medical treatment for religious reasons or culture. Biochemists often disagree among themselves about the limits of proper discipline, debating whether the field should pay attention to the ethical evaluation of all questions involving biology and medicine, or just some of these questions. Some bioethicists will narrow the evaluation of ethics only on the morality of medical care or technological innovation, and time of human medical care. Others will broaden the scope of ethical evaluation to include the morality of all actions that might help or harm a living organism capable of feeling fear.

The scope of bioethics can develop with biotechnology, including cloning, gene therapy, life extension, human genetic engineering, astroetics and space life, and basic biological manipulation through DNA, XNA and altered proteins. These developments will affect future evolution, and may require new principles that address life in essence, such as biotic ethics that values ​​life itself on basic biological processes and structures, and seek their propagation.

src: i.ytimg.com

Principles

One of the first areas handled by modern bioethicists is human experimentation. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects Biomedical and Behavioral Research was originally established in 1974 to identify basic ethical principles that should underlie the implementation of biomedical and behavioral research involving human subjects. However, the basic principles announced in the Belmont Report (1979) - that is, respect for people, kindness and justice - have influenced bioethics thinking in various issues. Others have added non-maleficence, human dignity and the sanctity of life to this list of cardinal values. Overall, the Belmont Report (1979) has guided research in a focused direction to protect vulnerable subjects and encourage transparency between researchers and subjects. Research has evolved in the last 40 years and due to technological advances, it is estimated that human subjects have passed the Belmont Report (1979) and the need for desired revision.

Another important principle of bioethics is the placement of value in discussions and presentations. Many discussions based on bioethics groups exist at universities across the United States to champion those goals. Examples include the Ohio State Bioethics Society and the Bioethics Society of Cornell. Professional level versions of these organizations also exist.

Many bioethicists, especially medical scholars, give the highest priority to autonomy. They believe that every patient should determine which actions they deem best suited to their beliefs. In other words, patients should always have the freedom to choose their own care.

src: previews.123rf.com

Medical ethics

Medical ethics is the study of moral values ​​and judgments that apply to drugs. Four major moral commitments are respect for autonomy, kindness, nonmaleficence, and justice. Using these four principles and thinking about what the doctors special attention to their practice scope can help doctors make moral decisions. As a scientific discipline, medical ethics includes practical application in clinical settings as well as work on history, philosophy, theology, and sociology.

Medical ethics tends to be understood narrowly as professional ethics is applied, whereas bioethics has broader applications, touching on the philosophy of science and biotechnology issues. Two areas often overlap, and the difference is more about style than professional consensus. Medical ethics shares many principles with other branches of health care ethics, such as nursing ethics. A bioethicist helps the health care and research community to examine the moral issues involved in our understanding of life and death, resolving ethical dilemmas in medicine and science. This example will be the topic of equality in medicine, the crossroads of cultural practice and medical care, and issues of bioterrorism.

src: i.ytimg.com

Perspectives and methodology

Bioethics comes from a variety of backgrounds and has training in diverse disciplines. This field contains people trained in philosophy such as H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr. of Rice University, Baruch Brody of Rice University, Peter Singer of Princeton University, Daniel Callahan of Hastings Center, and Daniel Brock of Harvard University; medically trained medical ethicists such as Mark Siegler of the University of Chicago and Joseph Fins of Cornell University; lawyers such as Nancy Dubler of Albert Einstein College of Medicine or Jerry Menikoff of the Federal Office of Human Protection Research; political scientists such as Francis Fukuyama; scholars of religious studies including James Childress; public intellectuals such as Amitai Etzioni of The George Washington University; and theologians such as Lisa Sowle Cahill and Stanley Hauerwas. The fields, once dominated by formally trained philosophers, became increasingly interdisciplinary, with some critics even claiming that the analytic philosophy method had a negative effect on field development. Leading field journals include The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, The Hastings Center Report, The American Journal of Bioethics, The Journal of Medical Ethics , Bioethics , Kennedy Ethics Journal Institute and Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics . Bioethics has also benefited from the philosophy of the process developed by Alfred North Whitehead.

Many religious communities have their own history of investigation on bioethics issues and have developed rules and guidelines on how to deal with these issues from the standpoint of their respective religions. Jewish, Christian, and Muslim religions have each developed a great deal of literature on these matters. In the case of many non-Western cultures, strict religious separation from philosophy does not exist. In many Asian cultures, for example, there is a lively discussion of bioethics issues. Buddhist bioethics, in general, is characterized by a naturalistic view that leads to a pragmatic rationalistic approach. Buddhist bioethicists include Damien Keown. In India, Vandana Shiva is a prominent bioethicist speaking from the Hindu tradition. In Africa, and partly also in Latin America, the debate on bioethics often focuses on its practical relevance in the context of underdevelopment and geopolitical power relations. Masahiro Morioka argues that in Japan, the bioethics movement was first launched by disability and feminist activists in the early 1970s, while academic bioethics began in the mid-1980s. During this period, unique philosophical discussions about brain death and disability appeared in academia and journalism.

src: pjb.mycpanel2.princeton.edu

Criticism

As a research, bioethics also invites criticism. For example, Paul Farmer notes that bioethics tends to focus on issues arising from "too much attention" to patients in industrialized countries, while little or no attention is paid to ethical issues that care too little for the poor. Farmers characterize bioethics handling morally difficult clinical situations, usually in hospitals in industrialized countries, as "quandary ethics". He does not regard ethical quandary and clinical bioethics as unimportant; he argues, more precisely, that bioethics must be balanced and burden the poor.

In addition, bioethics has been criticized for its lack of diversity in thought, especially with regard to race. Even when the field has evolved to include areas of public opinion, policy making, and medical decisions, little or no academic writing is written about the intersection of race - especially cultural values ​​contained in constructive literature and bioethics. John Hoberman illustrates this point in criticism in 2016, in which he points out that bioethicists have traditionally refused to broaden their discourse to include relevant sociological and historical applications. The center for this is the notion of white normativity, which establishes the dominance of white hegemonic structures in academic bioethics and tends to reinforce existing biases.

Several criticisms have been made about the disability experience. Some people in the disabled community feel that mainstream bioethics embraces a healthy place of medical care and resources. Thinkers such as Princeton Peter Singer, who argue that parents have the right to choose healthy children over the handicapped, have disappointed the disabled, who feel threatened by his position.

src: s18798.pcdn.co

Problem

Christian bioethics explains how best to apply Christian values ​​for sustainable advancement in science and medicine. The Christian ethical mind has three categories of application: biblical ethics, natural law, and situational approach. These three theories can be used to better interpret the morality of various medical and research based decisions.

• Colson, Charles W. (ed.) (2004). Human Dignity in the Biotech Age: The Christian Vision for Public Policy . Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press. ISBNÃ, 0-8308-2783-8
• Demy, Timothy J. and Gary P. Stewart. (1998). Suicide: Christian Response: Important Considerations for Choosing Life . Grand Rapids: Kregel. ISBNÃ, 0-8254-2355-4
• Pope John Paul II. (1995). Evangelium Vitae: The Gospel of Life . New York: Random House. ISBNÃ, 0-8129-2671-4
• Kilner, John et al. (1995). Bioethics and the Future of Medicine: A Christian Appraiser . Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. ISBNÃ, 0-8028-4081-7
• Kilner, John F., Arlene B. Miller, and Edmund D. Pellegrino (eds.). (1996). Dignity and Death: A Christian Judge . Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co; and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press. ISBNÃ, 0-8028-4232-1
• Meilaender, Gilbert (2004). Bioethics: A Primer For Christians . Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. ISBNÃ, 0-8028-4234-8
• Loudovikos, Nikolaos, Protopresbyter (2002). Individualization of Death and Euthanasia , Holy Synod of the Greek Church, Bioethics Committee, Scientific Conference on Euthanasia (Athens, 17-18 May 2002), taken on 27 February 2009. (Articles in Greek).
• Pope Paul VI. (1968). Humanae vitae: Human Life . Vatican City.
• Cardinal William Levada. (2008) Instruction of 'Personae Dignity' on Specific Bioethical Questions.
• Smith, Wesley J. (2004). Consumer Guide for a Brave New World . San Francisco: Encounter Books. ISBN: 1-893554-99-6
• Smith, Wesley J. (2000). The Culture of Death: The Attack of Medical Ethics in America . San Francisco: Encounter Books. ISBNÃ, 1-893554-06-6
• Smith, Wesley J. (1997). Exit Coercion: Slippery Slope from Assassin's Suicide to Murder . New York: Times Books. ISBNÃ, 0-8129-2790-7
• Stewart, Gary P. et al. (1998). Basic Questions about Suicide and Euthanasia: Are They Ever Right? BioBasics Series. Grand Rapids: Kregel. ISBNÃ, 0-8254-3072-0
• Stewart, Gary P. et al. (1998). Basic Questions about the Final Decision on Life: How Do We Know What's Right? Grand Rapids: Kregel. ISBNÃ, 0-8254-3070-4
• Westphal, Euler Renato. O O vo OVO him - na era da seleÃÆ'§ÃÆ'  £ artificial (See Review of the Eighth Days (book)). 1. ed. SÃÆ' £ o Bento do Sul: UniÃÆ' £ o CristÃÆ' £, 2004. v. 01. 125 p.Ã, ISBNÃ, 85-87485-18-0
• Archimandrite Adam (Vakhtang Akhaladze) Man in Space and Bioethical Time. 2010

Muslim bioethics

• Hamdy, Sherine. "Our Bodies Belong to God: Organ Transplants, Islam, and the Struggle for Human Dignity in Egypt" (2012) Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-27176-0
• Al Khayat MH. "Health and Islamic Behavior" at: El Gindy AR, editor, Health policy, ethics and humanitarian values: Islamic perspectives . Kuwait: Organization of Islamic Medicine; 1995. pp.Ã, 447-50.
• Ebrahim, Abul Fadl Mohsin. (1989). Abortion, Birth Control and Parental Substitution. Islamic Perspective . Indianapolis. ISBNÃ, 0-89259-081-5
• Esposito, John. (ed.) (1995). "Surrogate Motherhood" in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Modern Modern World (vol 4). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN: 0-19-509615-0
• Karic, Enes. "Cloning Ethics" at Islamika Magazine Fall/Winter 2004. Problem # 11
• Special Collection and Islamic Medical and Scientific Database (IMSE) at Georgetown University

Buddhist bioethics

Source of the article : Wikipedia