Results for 'Procreative Beneficence'

174 found
Order:
  1. Procreative Beneficence and Genetic Enhancement.Walter Veit - 2018 - Kriterion - Journal of Philosophy 32 (1):75-92.
    Imagine a world where everyone is healthy, intelligent, long living and happy. Intuitively this seems wonderful albeit unrealistic. However, recent scienti c breakthroughs in genetic engineering, namely CRISPR/Cas bring the question into public discourse, how the genetic enhancement of humans should be evaluated morally. In 2001, when preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and in vitro fertilisation (IVF), enabled parents to select between multiple embryos, Julian Savulescu introduced the principle of procreative bene cence (PPB), stating that parents have the obligations to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  2. Procreative Beneficence, Obligation, and Eugenics.Robert Sparrow - 2007 - Genomics, Society and Policy 3 (3):43-59.
    The argument of Julian Savulescu’s 2001 paper, “Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best Children” is flawed in a number of respects. Savulescu confuses reasons with obligations and equivocates between the claim that parents have some reason to want the best for their children and the more radical claim that they are morally obligated to attempt to produce the best child possible. Savulescu offers a prima facie implausible account of parental obligation, as even the best parents typically (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  3. The real force of 'procreative beneficence'.Robert Sparrow - 2014 - In Akira Akayabashi (ed.), The Future of Bioethics: International Dialogues. Oxford University Press. pp. 183-192.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4. Welcoming Robots into the Moral Circle: A Defence of Ethical Behaviourism.John Danaher - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (4):2023-2049.
    Can robots have significant moral status? This is an emerging topic of debate among roboticists and ethicists. This paper makes three contributions to this debate. First, it presents a theory – ‘ethical behaviourism’ – which holds that robots can have significant moral status if they are roughly performatively equivalent to other entities that have significant moral status. This theory is then defended from seven objections. Second, taking this theoretical position onboard, it is argued that the performative threshold that robots need (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   72 citations  
  5. Well-being, Disability, and Choosing Children.Matthew J. Barker & Robert A. Wilson - 2019 - Mind 128 (510):305-328.
    The view that it is better for life to be created free of disability is pervasive in both common sense and philosophy. We cast doubt on this view by focusing on an influential line of thinking that manifests it. That thinking begins with a widely-discussed principle, Procreative Beneficence, and draws conclusions about parental choice and disability. After reconstructing two versions of this argument, we critique the first by exploring the relationship between different understandings of well-being and disability, and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  6. Termination of Pregnancy After NonInvasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT): Ethical Considerations.Tom Shakespeare & Richard Hull - 2018 - Journal of Practical Ethics 6 (2):32-54.
    This article explores the Nuffield Council on Bioethics’ recent report about non-invasive prenatal testing. Given that such testing is likely to become the norm, it is important to question whether there should be some ethical parameters regarding its use. The article engages with the viewpoints of Jeff McMahan, Julian Savulescu, Stephen Wilkinson and other commentators on prenatal ethics. The authors argue that there are a variety of moral considerations that legitimately play a significant role with regard to (prospective) parental decision-making (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  7. Resisting Sparrow's Sexy Reductio : Selection Principles and the Social Good.Simon Rippon, Pablo Stafforini, Katrien Devolder, Russell Powell & Thomas Douglas - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (7):16-18.
    Principles of procreative beneficence (PPBs) hold that parents have good reasons to select the child with the best life prospects. Sparrow (2010) claims that PPBs imply that we should select only female children, unlesswe attach normative significance to “normal” human capacities. We argue that this claim fails on both empirical and logical grounds. Empirically, Sparrow’s argument for greater female wellbeing rests on a selective reading of the evidence and the incorrect assumption that an advantage for females would persist (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  8. “Ethical Minefields” and the Voice of Common Sense: A Discussion with Julian Savulescu.Julian Savulescu & Evangelos D. Protopapadakis - 2019 - Conatus 4 (1):125-133.
    Theoretical ethics includes both metaethics (the meaning of moral terms) and normative ethics (ethical theories and principles). Practical ethics involves making decisions about every day real ethical problems, like decisions about euthanasia, what we should eat, climate change, treatment of animals, and how we should live. It utilizes ethical theories, like utilitarianism and Kantianism, and principles, but more broadly a process of reflective equilibrium and consistency to decide how to act and be.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  9. Parental Partiality and Future Children.Thomas Douglas - 2019 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 15 (1).
    Prospective parents are sometimes partial towards their future children, engaging in what I call ‘pre-parental partiality’. Common sense morality is as permissive of pre-parental partiality as it is of ordinary parental partiality—partiality towards one’s existing children. But I argue that existing justifications for partiality typically establish weaker reasons in support of pre-parental partiality than in support of parental partiality. Thus, either these existing justifications do not fully account for our reasons of parental partiality, or our reasons to engage in pre-parental (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  10. In Defense of Artificial Replacement.Derek Shiller - 2017 - Bioethics 31 (5):393-399.
    If it is within our power to provide a significantly better world for future generations at a comparatively small cost to ourselves, we have a strong moral reason to do so. One way of providing a significantly better world may involve replacing our species with something better. It is plausible that in the not‐too‐distant future, we will be able to create artificially intelligent creatures with whatever physical and psychological traits we choose. Granted this assumption, it is argued that we should (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  11. The procreative asymmetry and the impossibility of elusive permission.Jack Spencer - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 178 (11):3819-3842.
    This paper develops a form of moral actualism that can explain the procreative asymmetry. Along the way, it defends and explains the attractive asymmetry: the claim that although an impermissible option can be self-conditionally permissible, a permissible option cannot be self-conditionally impermissible.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  12. Procreative Ethics and the Problem of Evil.Jason Marsh - 2015 - In Sarah Hannan, Samantha Brennan & Vernon Richard (eds.), Permissible Progeny? The Morality of Procreation and Parenting. Oxford University Press. pp. 65-86.
    Many people think that the amount of evil and suffering we observe provides important and perhaps decisive evidence against the claim that a loving God created our world. Yet almost nobody worries about the ethics of human procreation. Can these attitudes be consistently maintained? This chapter argues that the most obvious attempts to justify a positive answer fail. The upshot is not that procreation is impermissible, but rather that we should either revise our beliefs about the severity of global arguments (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  13. Attitudes, intentions and procreative responsibility in current and future assisted reproduction.Davide Battisti - 2023 - Bioethics 37 (5):449-461.
    Procreative obligations are often discussed by evaluating only the consequences of reproductive actions or omissions; less attention is paid to the moral role of intentions and attitudes. In this paper, I assess whether intentions and attitudes can contribute to defining our moral obligations with regard to assisted reproductive technologies already available, such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), and those that may be available in future, such as reproductive genome editing and ectogenesis, in a way compatible with person‐affecting constraints. I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14. Social Beneficence.Jacob Barrett - manuscript
    A background assumption in much contemporary political philosophy is that justice is the first virtue of social institutions, taking priority over other values such as beneficence. This assumption is typically treated as a methodological starting point, rather than as following from any particular moral or political theory. In this paper, I challenge this assumption. To frame my discussion, I argue, first, that justice doesn’t in principle override beneficence, and second, that justice doesn’t typically outweigh beneficence, since, in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15. Beneficence, Justice, and Health Care.J. Paul Kelleher - 2014 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 24 (1):27-49.
    This paper argues that societal duties of health promotion are underwritten (at least in large part) by a principle of beneficence. Further, this principle generates duties of justice that correlate with rights, not merely “imperfect” duties of charity or generosity. To support this argument, I draw on a useful distinction from bioethics and on a somewhat neglected approach to social obligation from political philosophy. The distinction is that between general and specific beneficence; and the approach from political philosophy (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  16. Against procreative moral rights.Jake Earl - 2021 - Bioethics 36 (5):569-575.
    Many contemporary ethical debates turn on claims about the nature and extent of our alleged procreative moral rights: moral rights to procreate or not to procreate as we choose. In this article, I argue that there are no procreative moral rights, in that generally we do not have a distinctive moral right to procreate or not to procreate as we choose. However, interference with our procreative choices usually violates our nonprocreative moral rights, such as our moral rights (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  17. Weighing Identity in Procreative Decisions.Laura Kane - 2023 - Feminist Philosophy Quarterly 9 (3).
    The question of whether or not one should procreate is rarely cast as a personal choice in philosophical discourse; rather, it is presented as an ethical choice made against a backdrop of aggregate concerns. But justifications concerning procreation in popular culture regularly engage with the role that identity plays in making procreative decisions; specifically, how one’s decision will affect who they are and who they might be in the future. Women in particular cite the personally transformative aspects of becoming (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. Aggregation, Beneficence, and Chance.Tom Dougherty - 2013 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 7 (2):1-19.
    It is plausible to think that it is wrong to cure many people’s headaches rather than save someone else’s life. On the other hand, it is plausible to think that it is not wrong to expose someone to a tiny risk of death when curing this person’s headache. I will argue that these claims are inconsistent. For if we keep taking this tiny risk then it is likely that one person dies, while many others’ headaches are cured. In light of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  19. Harmful Beneficence.Lisa Rivera - 2011 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (2):197-222.
    Beneficence is usually regarded as adequate when it results in an actual benefit for a beneficiary and satisfies her self-chosen end. However, beneficence that satisfies these conditions can harm beneficiaries' free agency, particularly when they are robustly dependent on benefactors. First, the means that benefactors choose can have undesirable side-effects on resources that beneficiaries need for future free action. Second, benefactors may undermine beneficiaries' ability to freely deliberate and choose. It is therefore insufficient to satisfy someone's self-chosen ends. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  20. Procreative Liberty: The Case for Preconception Sex Selection.Edgar Dahl - 2003 - Reproductive Biomedicine Online 7 (4):380-384.
    Preconception sex selection for non-medical reasons raises serious moral, legal and social issues. The main concerns include the threat of a sex ratio distortion due to a common preference for boys over girls, the charge of sexism, the danger of reinforcing gender stereotypical behaviour in sex selected children, and the fear of a slippery slope towards creating designer babies. This paper endeavours to show that none of the objections to preconception sex selection is conclusive and that there is no justification (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  21. Risk, Responsibility, and Procreative Asymmetries.Rivka Weinberg - 2021 - In Stephen M. Gardiner (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Intergenerational Ethics. Oxford University Press.
    The author argues for a theory of responsibility for outcomes of imposed risk, based on whether it was permissible to impose the risk. When one tries to apply this persuasive model of responsibility for outcomes of risk imposition to procreation, which is a risk imposing act, one finds that it doesn’t match one’s intuitions about responsibility for outcomes of procreative risk. This mismatch exposes a justificatory gap for procreativity, namely, that procreation cannot avail itself of the shared vulnerability to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22. A Critical Take on Procreative Justice.Joona Räsänen, Andreas Bengtson, Hugo Cossette-Lefebvre & Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen - 2024 - Bioethics 38 (4):367-374.
    Herjeet Kaur Marway recently proposed the Principle of Procreative Justice, which says that reproducers have a strong moral obligation to avoid completing race and colour injustices through their selection choices. In this article, we analyze this principle and argue, appealing to a series of counterexamples, that some of the implications of Marway's Principle of Procreative Justice are difficult to accept. This casts doubt on whether the principle should be adopted. Also, we show that there are some more principled (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Beneficence, rights and citizenship.Garrett Cullity - 2006 - Australian Journal of Human Rights 9:85-105.
    What are we morally required to do for strangers? To answer this question – a question about the scope of requirements to aid strangers – we must first answer a question about justification: why are we required to aid them (when we are)? The main paper focuses largely on answering the question about justification, but does so in order to arrive at an answer to the question about scope. Three main issues are discussed. First, to what extent should requirements of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  24. Beneficence.Garrett Cullity - 2007 - In Richard Ashcroft Angus Dawson & Heather Draper John McMillan (eds.), Principles of Health Care Ethics. London: Wiley. pp. 19-26.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  25. Unraveling the Asymmetry in Procreative Ethics.Trevor Hedberg - 2016 - APA Newsletter on Philosophy and Medicine 15 (2):18-21.
    The Asymmetry in procreative ethics consists of two claims. The first is that it is morally wrong to bring into existence a child who will have an abjectly miserable life; the second is that it is permissible not to bring into existence a child who will enjoy a very happy life. In this paper, I distinguish between two variations of the Asymmetry. The first is the Abstract Asymmetry, the idealized variation of the Asymmetry that many philosophers have been trying (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  26. Beneficence, Paternalism, and the Parental Prerogative – the Ethics of Mandatory Early Childhood Vaccination.Frej Thomsen - manuscript
    Insufficient vaccination coverage is an important public health problem in many countries, since it leads to the loss of herd protection and the resurgence of previously exterminated diseases. However, policies of mandatory childhood vaccination capable of raising vaccination rates continue to be controversial. In this article I review the arguments for mandatory childhood vaccination, setting out the strongest teleological argument in favour, and then critically examining the two strongest potential objections: paternalism and the parental prerogative. I argue that the challenge (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. Pooled beneficence.Garrett Cullity - 2000 - In Michael Almeida (ed.), Imperceptible Harms and Benefits. Dordrecht: Kluwer. pp. 9-42.
    There can be situations in which, if I contribute to a pool of resources for helping a large number of people, the difference that my contribution makes to any of the people helped from the pool will be imperceptible at best, and maybe even non-existent. And this can be the case where it is also true that giving the same amount directly to one of the intended beneficiaries of the pool would have made a very large difference to her. Can (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  28. Justice and Beneficence.Pablo Gilabert - 2016 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 19 (5):508-533.
    What is a duty of justice? And how is it different from a duty of beneficence? We need a clear account of the contrast. Unfortunately, there is no consensus in the philosophical literature as to how to characterize it. Different articulations of it have been provided, but it is hard to identify a common core that is invariant across them. In this paper, I propose an account of how to understand duties of justice, explain how it contrasts with several (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  29. Which Duties of Beneficence Should Agents Discharge on Behalf of Principals? A Reflection through Shareholder Primacy.Santiago Mejia - 2021 - Business Ethics Quarterly 31 (3):421-449.
    Scholars who favor shareholder primacy usually claim either that managers should not fulfill corporate duties of beneficence or that, if they are required to fulfill them, they do so by going against their obligations to shareholders. Distinguishing between structurally different types of duties of beneficence and recognizing the full force of the normative demands imposed on managers reveal that this view needs to be qualified. Although it is correct to think that managers, when acting on behalf of shareholders, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  30. Measuring Impartial Beneficence: A Kantian Perspective on the Oxford Utilitarianism Scale.Emilian Mihailov - 2022 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 14 (3):989-1004.
    To capture genuine utilitarian tendencies, (Kahane et al., Psychological Review 125:131, 2018) developed the Oxford Utilitarianism Scale (OUS) based on two subscales, which measure the commitment to impartial beneficence and the willingness to cause harm for the greater good. In this article, I argue that the impartial beneficence subscale, which breaks ground with previous research on utilitarian moral psychology, does not distinctively measure utilitarian moral judgment. I argue that Kantian ethics captures the all-encompassing impartial concern for the well-being (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  31. II- What's Wrong with Being Lonely? Justice, Beneficence, and Meaningful Relatopnships.Laura Valentini - 2016 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 90 (1):49-69.
    A life without liberty and material resources is not a good life. Equally, a life devoid of meaningful social relationships—such as friendships, family attachments, and romances—is not a good life. From this it is tempting to conclude that just as individuals have rights to liberty and material resources, they also have rights to access meaningful social relationships. I argue that this conclusion can be defended only in a narrow set of cases. ‘Pure’ social relationship deprivation—that is, deprivation that is not (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  32. Kant and the demandingness of the virtue of beneficence.Paul Formosa & Martin Sticker - 2019 - European Journal of Philosophy 27 (3):625-642.
    We discuss Kant’s conception of beneficence against the background of the overdemandingness debate. We argue that Kant’s conception of beneficence constitutes a sweet spot between overdemandingess and undemandingess. To this end we defend four key claims that together constitute a novel interpretation of Kant’s account of beneficence: 1) for the same reason that we are obligated to be beneficent to others we are permitted to be beneficent to ourselves; 2) we can prioritise our own ends; 3) it (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  33. Public health, beneficence and cosmopolitan justice.L. Horn - 2015 - South African Journal of Bioethics and Law 8 (2):30.
    This article proposes that, in line with moral-cosmopolitan theorists, affluent nations have an obligation, founded in justice and not merely altruism or beneficence, to share the responsibility of the burden of public health implementation in low-income contexts. The current Ebola epidemic highlights the fact that countries with under-developed health systems and limited resources cannot cope with a significant and sudden health threat. The link between burden of disease, adverse factors in the social environment and poverty is well established and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. Give till it hurts? Beneficence, imperfect duties, and a moderate response to the aid question.Robert Noggle - 2009 - Journal of Social Philosophy 40 (1):1-16.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  35. Imperfect Duties, Group Obligations, and Beneficence.S. Andrew Schroeder - 2014 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 11 (5):557-584.
    There is virtually no philosophical consensus on what, exactly, imperfect duties are. In this paper, I lay out three criteria which I argue any adequate account of imperfect duties should satisfy. Using beneficence as a leading example, I suggest that existing accounts of imperfect duties will have trouble meeting those criteria. I then propose a new approach: thinking of imperfect duties as duties held by groups, rather than individuals. I show, again using the example of beneficence, that this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  36. 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  
  37. Are Saviour Siblings a Special Case in Procreative Ethics?Caleb Althorpe & Elizabeth Finneron-Burns - forthcoming - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy.
    Children conceived in order to donate biological material to save the life of an already existing child are known as 'saviour siblings'. The primary reasons that have been offered against the practice are: (i) creating a saviour sibling has negative impacts on the created child and (ii) creating a saviour child represents a wrongful procreative motivation of the parents. In this paper we examine to what extent the creation of saviour siblings actually presents a special case in procreative (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38. Between Sisyphus's Rock and a Warm and Fuzzy Place: Procreative Ethics and the Meaning of Life.Rivka Weinberg - 2022 - In Iddo Landau (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Meaning in Life. New York, NY, USA:
    This paper suggests that there are three kinds of meaning: Everyday, Cosmic, and Ultimate. Everyday meaning refers to the value and significance in our everyday lives, including values such as beauty, morality, and truth, and the significance of engagement with them. Cosmic meaning refers to our meaningful role in the cosmos: to the significance and value of our cosmic niche, to the purposes of the cosmos and our place in it. Ultimate meaning is the end-regarding justifying reason, the valued end, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39. Balancing commitments: Own-happiness and beneficence.Donald Wilson - 2017 - Contemporary Studies in Kantian Philosophy 2017.
    There is a familiar problem in moral theories that recognize positive obligations to help others related to the practical room these obligations leave for ordinary life, and the risk that open-ended obligations to help others will consume our lives and resources. Responding to this problem, Kantians have tended to emphasize the idea of limits on positive obligations but are typically unsatisfactorily vague about the nature and extent of these limits. I argue here that aspects of Kant’s discussion of duties of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. Towards a More Credible Principle of Beneficence.Prasasti Pandit - 2021 - Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research 38 (3):407–422.
    My objective of this paper is to suggest and workout a more credible form of the Principle of Beneficence from the common essential elements of the three major ethical theories (Deontology, Utilitarianism and Virtue Ethics) that will try to overcome the over-demanding objection of Utilitarianism and the rigorism of Kant’s Deontology. After analyzing these three moral systems, I find that beneficence lies within the very essence of humanity. Human beings are superior to other creatures in the world due (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. Quality of Life Assessments, Cognitive Reliability, and Procreative Responsibility.Jason Marsh - 2014 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 89 (2):436-466.
    Recent work in the psychology of happiness has led some to conclude that we are unreliable assessors of our lives and that skepticism about whether we are happy is a genuine possibility worth taking very seriously. I argue that such claims, if true, have worrisome implications for procreation. In particular, they show that skepticism about whether many if not most people are well positioned to create persons is a genuine possibility worth taking very seriously. This skeptical worry should not be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  42. For the Sake of the Friendship: Relationality and Relationship as Grounds of Beneficence.Thaddeus Metz - 2010 - Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory 57 (125):54-76.
    I contend that there are important moral reasons for individuals, organisations and states to aid others that have gone largely unrecognised in the literature. Most of the acknowledged reasons for acting beneficently in the absence of a promise to do so are either impartial and intrinsic, on the one hand, being grounded in properties internal to and universal among individuals, such as their pleasure or autonomy, or partial and extrinsic, on the other, being grounded in non-universal properties regarding an actual (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  43. Filial Obligation, Kant's Duty of Beneficence, and Need.Sarah Clark Miller - 2003 - In James M. Humber & Robert F. Almeder (eds.), Care of the Aged. Springer. pp. 169-197.
    Do adult children have a particular duty, or set of duties, to their aging parents? What might the normative source and content of filial obligation be? This chapter examines Kant’s duty of beneficence in The Doctrine of Virtue and the Groundwork, suggesting that at its core, performance of filial duty occurs in response to the needs of aging parents. The duty of beneficence accounts for inevitable vulnerabilities that befall human rational beings and reveals moral agents as situated in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  44. The Dialectic of Autonomy and Beneficence in the Standard Argument for ‘Death with Dignity'.Bell Jeremy Raymond - 2016 - Solidarity: The Journal of Catholic Social Thought and Secular Ethics 6 (1):Article 3.
    Philosophers who defend a person’s right, under certain circumstances, to end his own life or to have a physician end it for him typically appeal both to respect for patient autonomy and to considerations of beneficence. Neither autonomy alone nor beneficence alone can ground a persuasive case for euthanasia. I argue, however, that the standard argument for euthanasia is unsound. It is not possible to combine the principles of autonomy and beneficence in such a way as to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45. Inclusive Ethics Extending Beneficence and Egalitarian Justice by Ingmar Persson. [REVIEW]Jonathan Lewis - 2017 - Metapsychology 21 (45).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46. Gun Control, the Right to Self-Defense, and Reasonable Beneficence to All.Dustin Crummett & Philip Swenson - 2019 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 6.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  47. Genetic Affinity and the Right to ‘Three-parent IVF’.G. Owen Schaefer & Markus Labude - 2017 - Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 34 (12):1577-1580.
    With the recent report of a live birth after use of Mitochondrial replacement therapy, sometimes called ‘Three-parent IVF’, the clinical application of the technique is fast becoming a reality. While the United Kingdom allows the procedure under regulatory scrutiny, it remains effectively outlawed in many other countries. We argue that such prohibitions may violate individuals’ procreative rights, grounded in individuals’ interest in genetic affinity. The interest in genetic affinity was recently endorsed by Singapore’s highest court, reflecting an emphasis on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  48. How Autonomy Can Legitimate Beneficial Coercion.Lucie White - 2017 - In Jakov Gather, Tanja Henking, Alexa Nossek & Jochen Vollmann (eds.), Beneficial Coercion in Psychiatry? Foundations and Challenges. Münster: Mentis. pp. 85-99.
    Respect for autonomy and beneficence are frequently regarded as the two essential principles of medical ethics, and the potential for these two principles to come into conflict is often emphasised as a fundamental problem. On the one hand, we have the value of beneficence, the driving force of medicine, which demands that medical professionals act to protect or promote the wellbeing of patients or research subjects. On the other, we have a principle of respect for autonomy, which demands (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  49. Affecting future individuals: Why and when germline genome editing entails a greater moral obligation towards progeny.Davide Battisti - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (5):1-9.
    Assisted reproductive technologies have greatly increased our control over reproductive choices, leading some bioethicists to argue that we face unprecedented moral obligations towards progeny. Several models attempting to balance the principle of procreative autonomy with these obligations have been proposed. The least demanding is the minimal threshold model (MTM), according to which every reproductive choice is permissible, except creating children whose lives will not be worth living. Hence, as long as the future child is likely to have a life (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  50. Principlism and Contemporary Ethical Considers in Transgender Health Care.Luke Allen, Noah Adams, Florence Ashley, Cody Dodd, Diane Ehrensaft, Lin Fraser, Maurice Garcia, Simona Giordano, Jamison Green, Thomas Johnson, Justin Penny, Rachlin Katherine & Jaimie Veale - forthcoming - International Journal of Transgender Health.
    Background: Transgender health care is a subject of much debate among clinicians, political commentators, and policy-makers. While the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care (SOC) establish clinical standards, these standards contain implied ethics but lack explicit focused discussion of ethical considerations in providing care. An ethics chapter in the SOC would enhance clinical guidelines. Aims: We aim to provide a valuable guide for healthcare professionals, and anyone interested in the ethical aspects of clinical support for gender (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 174