12 found
Order:
  1. Necessary Conditions for Morally Responsible Animal Research.David Degrazia & Jeff Sebo - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (4):420-430.
    In this paper, we present three necessary conditions for morally responsible animal research that we believe people on both sides of this debate can accept. Specifically, we argue that, even if human beings have higher moral status than nonhuman animals, animal research is morally permissible only if it satisfies (a) an expectation of sufficient net benefit, (b) a worthwhile-life condition, and (c) a no unnecessary-harm/qualified-basic-needs condition. We then claim that, whether or not these necessary conditions are jointly sufficient conditions of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  2. Modal Personhood and Moral Status: A Reply to Kagan's Proposal.David DeGrazia - 2015 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 33 (1):22-25.
    Kagan argues that human beings who are neither persons nor even potential persons — if their impairment is independent of genetic constitution — are modal persons: individuals who might have been persons. Moreover, he proposes a view according to which both personhood and modal personhood are sufficient for counting more, morally, than nonhuman animals. In response to this proposal, I raise one relatively minor concern about Kagan's reasoning — that he judges too quickly that insentient beings can have interests — (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  3. Sentient Nonpersons and the Disvalue of Death.David DeGrazia - 2016 - Bioethics 30 (7):511-519.
    Implicit in our everyday attitudes and practices is the assumption that death ordinarily harms a person who dies. A far more contested matter is whether death harms sentient individuals who are not persons, a category that includes many animals and some human beings. On the basis of the deprivation account of the harm of death, I argue that death harms sentient nonpersons. I next consider possible bases for the commonsense judgment that death ordinarily harms persons more than it harms sentient (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  4. Ethical Reflections on Genetic Enhancement with the Aim of Enlarging Altruism.David DeGrazia - 2016 - Health Care Analysis 24 (3):180-195.
    When it comes to caring about and helping those in need, our imaginations tend to be weak and our motivation tends to be parochial. This is a major moral problem in view of how much unmet need there is in the world and how much material capacity there is to address that need. With this problem in mind, the present paper will focus on genetic means to the enhancement of a moral capacity—a disposition to altruism—and of a cognitive capacity that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  5. Can Knowledge Itself Justify Harmful Research?Jeff Sebo & David Degrazia - 2020 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 29 (2):302-307.
    In our paper, we argue for three necessary conditions for morally permissible animal research: (1) an assertion (or expectation) of sufficient net benefit, (2) a worthwhile-life condition, and (3) a no-unnecessary-harm/qualified-basic-needs condition. We argue that these conditions are necessary, without taking a position on whether they are jointly sufficient. In their excellent commentary on our paper, Matthias Eggel, Carolyn Neuhaus, and Herwig Grimm (hereafter, the authors) argue for a friendly amendment to one of our three conditions. In particular, they argue (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6. Nonhuman Primates, Human Need, and Ethical Constraints.David DeGrazia - 2016 - Hastings Center Report 46 (4):27-28.
    “The Ethics of Infection Challenges in Primates,” by Anne Barnhill, Steven Joffe, and Franklin Miller, is an exceptionally timely contribution to the literature on animal research ethics. Animal research has long been both a source of high hopes and a cause for moral concern. When it comes to infection challenge studies with nonhuman primates, neither the hope—to save thousands of human lives from such diseases as Ebola and Marburg—nor the concern—the conviction that primates deserve especially strong protections—could be much higher. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  7. Value Theory, Beneficence, and Medical Decision-Making.David DeGrazia - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (3):71-73.
    Volume 20, Issue 3, March 2020, Page 71-73.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8. Ethics of patient activation: exploring its relation to personal responsibility, autonomy and health disparities.Sophia H. Gibert, David DeGrazia & Marion Danis - 2017 - Journal of Medical Ethics 43 (10):670-675.
    Discussions of patient-centred care and patient autonomy in bioethics have tended to focus on the decision-making context and the process of obtaining informed consent, leaving open the question of how patients ought to be counselled in the daily maintenance of their health and management of chronic disease. Patient activation is an increasingly prominent counselling approach and measurement tool that aims to improve patients’ confidence and skills in managing their own health conditions. The strategy, which has received little conceptual or ethical (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  9. Parents of Adults with Diminished Self-Governance.Jennifer Desante, David Degrazia & Marion Danis - 2016 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 25 (1):93-107.
    Most theories of parenthood assume, at least implicitly, that a child will grow up to be an independent, autonomous adult. However, some children with cognitive limitations or psychiatric illness are unable to do so. For this reason, these accounts do not accommodate the circumstances and responsibilities of parents of such adult children. Our article attempts to correct this deficiency. In particular, we describe some of the common characteristics and experiences of this population of parents and children, examine the unique aspects (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10. A reply to critics of Creation Ethics.David DeGrazia - 2015 - Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (5):423-424.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  11. Relieving pain using dose-extending placebos.Luana Colloca, Paul Enck & David DeGrazia - 2016 - PAIN 157:1590-1598.
    Placebos are often used by clinicians, usually deceptively and with little rationale or evidence of benefit, making their use ethically problematic. In contrast with their typical current use, a provocative line of research suggests that placebos can be intentionally exploited to extend analgesic therapeutic effects. Is it possible to extend the effects of drug treatments by interspersing placebos? We reviewed a database of placebo studies, searching for studies that indicate that placebos given after repeated administration of active treatments acquire medication-like (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. Response.David DeGrazia - 1991 - Between the Species 7 (2):79-80.
    Response to Squadrito, Kathy. "Commentary: Interests and Equal Moral Status." Between the Species 7, no. 2 (1991): 78-79.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark