Bioethics represents a dramatic revision of the centuries-old professional ethics that governed the behavior of physicians and their relationships with patients. This venerable ethics code was challenged in the years after World War II by the remarkable advances in the biomedical sciences and medicine that raised questions about the definition of death, the use of life-support systems, organ transplantation, and reproductive interventions. In response, philosophers and theologians, lawyers and social scientists joined together with physicians and scientists to rethink and revise (...) the old standards. Governments established commissions to recommend policies. Courts heard arguments and legislatures passed laws. This book is the first broad history of the growing field of bioethics. Covering the period 1947-1987, it examines the origin and evolution of the debates over human experimentation, genetic engineering, organ transplantation, termination of life-sustaining treatment, and new reproductive technologies. It assesses the contributions of philosophy, theology, law and the social sciences to the expanding discourse of bioethics. Written by one of the field's founders, The Birth of Bioethics is based on extensive archival research into sources that are difficult to obtain and on interviews with many of the leading figures in the moral debates in medicine. A very readable and comprehensive account of the evolution of bioethics, this book stresses the history of ideas but does not neglect the social and cultural context and the people involved. It will serve the information needs of philosophers, ethicists, social historians, and everyone interested in the origins of some of today's most hotly debated issues. (shrink)

In recent years, virtue theories have enjoyed a renaissance of interest among general and medical ethicists. This book offers a virtue-based ethic for medicine, the health professions, and health care. Beginning with a historical account of the concept of virtue, the authors construct a theory of the place of the virtues in medical practice. Their theory is grounded in the nature and ends of medicine as a special kind of human activity. The concepts of virtue, the virtues, and the virtuous (...) physician are examined along with the place of the virtues of trust, compassion, prudence, justice, courage, temperance, and effacement of self-interest in medicine. The authors discuss the relationship between and among principles, rules, virtues, and the philosophy of medicine. They also address the difference virtue-based ethics makes in confronting such practical problems as care of the poor, research with human subjects, and the conduct of the healing relationship. This book woith the author's previous volumes, A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice and For the Patient's Good, are part of their continuing project of developing a coherent moral philosophy of medicine. (shrink)

Twelve contributors discuss critical issues affecting medical ethics. Topics include: the normative principles of medical ethics, concepts of health and disease, the physician-patient relationship, human experimentation, informed consent, genetics, ethical issues in organ transplantation, and moral.

The Report's editorial mandate is both to examine issues of current importance and to invite bioethics to broaden the range of issues it probes. Thus along with articles exploring the relationship between patients and doctors, or health policy, or any of the myriad other familiar concerns of ethics in medicine, from time to time the Report has published articles about public health, animal experimentation, or “environmental ethics” broadly construed. The most recent was the special supplement Nature, Polis, Ethics in the (...) November‐December (1998) issue. Some, of course, have argued that “bio‐ethics” ought always to encompass concern for issues beyond the bedside. When the biologist Van Rensselaer Potter proposed the term bioethics nearly thirty years ago, the field he had in mind lay at the intersection of ethics and the biological sciences in general. In light especially of Nature, Polis, Ethics's call for a substantive “humans‐nature ethics” it seems appropriate, therefore, to invite one of the earliest proponents of a generous understanding of bioethics to reflect on the character of the field and the questions with which it should grapple. Below Potter and colleague Peter Whitehouse share their thoughts on this most interdisciplinary of disciplines. —B‐JC, GK. (shrink)

Henry Knowles Beecher, an icon of human research ethics, and Timothy Francis Leary, a guru of the counterculture, are bound together in history by the synthetic hallucinogen lysergic acid diethylamide. Beecher was a U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel who received five battle stars, was inducted into the Legion of Merit, held the first endowed chair in his discipline, wrote at least three path-breaking papers, and is honored by two prestigious ethics awards in his name. Leary was a West Point dropout who (...) was obliged to leave a research assistant professorship, was convicted of violating the Marihuana Tax Act, was sentenced to 20 years in prison and broke out with the... (shrink)

In 1997, thanks to a conference paper by Rolf Löther of Berlin Humboldt University, the name of Fritz Jahr (1895-1953) was mentioned for the first time as the creator of the term and concept of bioethics (Bio-Ethik). As yet, Hans-Martin Sass of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics has been the only one to analyze Jahr's ideas more thoroughly, dedicating to the subject a series of papers (see Sass 2007). In December 2010, a collection of 15 papers by Jahr was published (...) in the German original, while in May 2011, a selection of 16 papers appeared in English translation (Jahr 2011).So who, in fact, was Jahr? A humble teacher and curate who never left his home city of Halle, an old university center on the Saale River in .. (shrink)

ABSTRACT The bioethics of the so‐called ‘peripheral countries’ must preferably be concerned with persistent situations, that is, with those problems that are still happening, but should not happen anymore in the 21st century. Resulting conflicts cannot be exclusively analysed based on ethical (or bioethical) theories derived from ‘central countries.’ The authors warn of the growing lack of political analysis of moral conflicts and of human indignation. The indiscriminate utilisation of the bioethics justification as a neutral methodological tool softens and even (...) cancels out the seriousness of several problems, even those that might result in the most profound social distortions. The current study takes as a theoretical reference the fact that natural resources (which all of us are) are finite, and that corporeal, pleasurable and painful matters (which affect us all) are relevant. Based on these premises, and on the concept that equity means ‘treating unevenly the unequal’, a proposal of a hard bioethics (or intervention bioethics) is introduced, in defence of the historical interests and rights of economically and socially excluded populations that are separated from the international developmental process. (shrink)

Are there universal ethical principles that should govern the conduct of medicine and research worldwide? -- Is it morally acceptable to buy and sell organs for human transplantation? -- Were it physically safe, would human reproductive cloning be acceptable? -- Is the deliberately induced abortion of a human pregnancy ethically justifiable? -- Is it ethical to patent or copyright genes, embryos, or their parts? -- Should minors have the right to refuse treatment, even when against the will of their parents (...) or guardians? -- Is physician-assisted suicide ever ethical? -- Should stem cell research utilizing embryonic tissue be conducted? -- Should we prohibit the use of chimpanzees and other great apes in biomedical research? -- Should the United States of America adopt universal health care? -- Is there a legitimate place for human genetic enhancement? -- Can there be agreement as to what constitutes human death? -- Is there ever a circumstance in which a doctor may withhold information? -- Should in vitro fertilization be an option for a woman? -- Are international clinical trials exploitative? (shrink)

The most casual conversation about Latin American life, politics, or culture can turn into a shouting match just by innocently asking the table to define what Latin America is. Some will dismiss the term as an American construct that fails to capture the geographic and cultural complexities of the former Spanish colonies. Others will fervently argue that despite its imprecision—or perhaps because of it—this lexical wild card connotes an aspiration of brotherhood against colonialist threats past and present. When the dust (...) settles, both sides will likely concede that the question is a beguiling one indeed. (shrink)