11 found
Order:
  1. Moral Distress: What Are We Measuring?Laura Kolbe & Inmaculada de Melo-Martin - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 23 (4):46-58.
    While various definitions of moral distress have been proposed, some agreement exists that it results from illegitimate constraints in clinical practice affecting healthcare professionals’ moral agency. If we are to reduce moral distress, instruments measuring it should provide relevant information about such illegitimate constraints. Unfortunately, existing instruments fail to do so. We discuss here several shortcomings of major instruments in use: their inability to determine whether reports of moral distress involve an accurate assessment of the requisite clinical and logistical facts (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  2. Socially responsible science: Exploring the complexities.Inmaculada de Melo-Martín & Kristen Intemann - 2023 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 13 (3):1-18.
    Philosophers of science, particularly those working on science and values, often talk about the need for science to be socially responsible. However, what this means is not clear. In this paper, we review the contributions of philosophers of science to the debate over socially responsible science and explore the dimensions that a fruitful account of socially responsible science should address. Our review shows that offering a comprehensive account is difficult. We contend that broad calls for socially responsible science that fail (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3. Reproductive Embryo Editing: Attending to Justice.Inmaculada De Melo-Martín - 2022 - Hastings Center Report 52 (4):26-33.
    The use of genome embryo editing tools in reproduction is often touted as a way to ensure the birth of healthy and genetically related children. Many would agree that this is a worthy goal. The purpose of this paper is to argue that, if we are concerned with justice, accepting such goal as morally appropriate commits one to rejecting the development of embryo editing for reproductive purposes. This is so because safer and more effective means exist that can allow many (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  4. On the Harms of Agnotological Practices and How to Address Them.Inmaculada de Melo-Martín - 2023 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 36 (3):211-228.
    Although science is our most reliable producer of knowledge, it can also be used to create ignorance, unjustified doubt, and misinformation. In doing so, agnotological practices result not only in epistemic harms but also in social ones. A way to prevent or minimise such harms is to impede these ignorance-producing practices. In this paper, I explore various challenges to such a proposal. I first argue that reliably identifying agnotological practices in a way that permits the prevention of relevant harms is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5. On masks and masking: epistemic harms and science communication.Kristen Intemann & Inmaculada de Melo-Martín - 2023 - Synthese 202 (3):1-17.
    During emerging public health crises, both policymakers and members of the public are looking to scientific experts to provide guidance. Even in cases where there are significant uncertainties, there is pressure for experts to “speak with one voice” to avoid confusion, allow officials to make evidence-based decisions rapidly, and encourage public support for such decisions. This can lead experts to engage in masking of information about the state of the science or regarding assumptions involved in policy recommendations. Although experts might (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6. (1 other version)The Trouble With Moral Enhancement.Inmaculada de Melo-Martín - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83:19-33.
    Proponents of moral enhancement believe that we should pursue and apply biotechnological means to morally enhance human beings, as failing to do so is likely to lead to humanity's demise. Unsurprisingly, these proposals have generated a substantial amount of debate about the moral permissibility of using such interventions. Here I put aside concerns about the permissibility of moral enhancement and focus on the conceptual and evidentiary grounds for the moral enhancement project. I argue that such grounds are quite precarious.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  7. When the Milk of Human Kindness Becomes a Luxury Good.Inmaculada de Melo-Martin - 2017 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 26 (1):159-165.
    A new reprogenetic technology, mitochondrial replacement, is making its appearance and, unsurprisingly given its promise to wash off our earthly stains --or at least the scourges of sexual reproduction--, John Harris finds only reasons to celebrate this new scientific feat.1 In fact, he finds mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRTs) so “unreservedly welcome” that he believes those who reject them suffer from “a large degree of desperation and not a little callousness.”2 Believing myself to be neither desperate nor callous, but finding myself (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  8. Concerns about Contextual Values in Science and the Legitimate/Illegitimate Distinction.Inmaculada de Melo-Martin - 2024 - Philosophy of Science 91 (4):851-868.
    Philosophers of science have come to accept that contextual values can play unavoidable and desirable roles in science. This has raised concerns about the need to distinguish legitimate and illegitimate value influences in scientific inquiry. I discuss here four such concerns: epistemic distortion, value imposition, undermining of public trust in science, and the use of objectionable values. I contend that preserving epistemic integrity and avoiding value imposition provide good reasons to attempt to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate influences of values (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  87
    A Closer Look to the Problem of Scientific Misinformation.Inmaculada de Melo-Martin - manuscript
    Science is our most reliable producer of knowledge. Nonetheless, a significant amount of evidence shows that pluralities of members of publics question a variety of accepted scientific claims as well as policies and recommendation informed by the scientific evidence. Scientific misinformation is considered to play a central role in this state of affairs. In this paper, I challenge the emphasis on misinformation as a primary culprit on two grounds. First, the phenomenon of misinformation is far less clear than what much (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. The commercialization of the biomedical sciences: (mis)understanding bias.Inmaculada de Melo-Martín - 2019 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 41 (3):34.
    The growing commercialization of scientific research has raised important concerns about industry bias. According to some evidence, so-called industry bias can affect the integrity of the science as well as the direction of the research agenda. I argue that conceptualizing industry’s influence in scientific research in terms of bias is unhelpful. Insofar as industry sponsorship negatively affects the integrity of the research, it does so through biasing mechanisms that can affect any research independently of the source of funding. Talk about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  11. “I Want to Do It, But I Want to Make Sure That I Do It Right.” Views of Patients with Parkinson’s Disease Regarding Early Stem Cell Clinical Trial Participation.Inmaculada de Melo-Martín, Michael Holtzman & Katrina S. Hacker - 2020 - AJOB Empirical Bioethics 11 (3):160-171.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark