Confronting deep moral disagreement: the President's Council on Bioethics, moral status, and human embryos

The report of the President's Council on Bioethics, Human Cloning and Human Dignity, addresses the central ethical, political, and policy issue in human embryonic stem cell research: the moral status of extracorporeal human embryos. The Council members were in sharp disagreement on this issue and essentially failed to adequately engage and respectfully acknowledge each others' deepest moral concerns, despite their stated commitment to do so. This essay provides a detailed critique of the two extreme views on the Council (i.e., embryos have full moral status or they have none at all) and then gives theoretical grounding for our judgment about the intermediate moral status of embryos. It also supplies an account of how to address profound moral disagreements in the public arena, especially by way of constructing a middle ground that deliberately pays sincere respect to the views of those with whom it has deep disagreements.     

Public health concerns take center stage in Nuffield Council on Bioethics

Summary Nonhuman primates represent an important reservoir for the transmission of new infectious diseases to humans. While several working groups and international agencies have grappled with the ethics of xenotransplantation, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics have recently published a comprehensive and far-reaching series of recommendations that, while not eliminating the infectious disease risks, have nonetheless detailed the major points for concern and have developed a rational approach to minimizing these risks. This report should serve as the blueprint from which to proceed with xenotransplantation. Dr. Allan’s research focuses on simian retroviruses, including simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIV).     

Bioethics as a new human rights emphasis in European research policy.

Although issues of morals and ethics remain largely a national matter, the European Community (EC) and the Council of Europe have taken an increasing interest in identifying and harmonizing the often conflicting policies of the European countries on bioethical matters. This article examines the role these organizations are playing and identifies some of the initiatives that have been taken in specific areas.     

The Baroness's Comittee and the President's Council: ambition and alienation in public bioethics

The President's Council on Bioethics has tried to make a distinctive contribution to the methodology of such public bodies in developing what it has styled a "richer bioethics." The Council's procedure contrasts with more modest methods of public bioethical deliberation employed by the United Kingdom's Warnock Committee. The practices of both bodies are held up against the backdrop of concerns about moral and political alienation, prompted by the limitations of moral reasoning and by moral dissent from state policy under even the most democratic of governments. Although the President's Council's rhetoric is often scrupulously conciliatory, recurring features of its argumentative practice are regrettably divisive. They order these things better in Britain.     

Patently controversial: markets,morals, and the President's proposal for embryonic stem cell research

This essay considers the implications of President George W. Bush's proposal for human embryonic stem cell research. Through the perspective of patent law, privacy, and informed consent, we elucidate the ongoing controversy about the moral standing of human embryonic stem cells and their derivatives and consider how the inconsistencies in the president's proposal will affect clinical practice and research.     

Stem cell research: an ethical evaluation of policy options

In February 2004, South Korean researchers became the first in the world to successfully harvest stem cells and establish a stem cell line from a cloned human embryo. This is just one of eight possible policy options concerning human embryonic stem cell research. In practice, every kind of stem cell research can be done in one country or another. This paper evaluates the eight policy options concerning human embryonic stem cell research in light of the arguments and decisions behind them.     

优巴斯关于国际生命伦理学的宣言

生命科学和医学科学提出了许多有关教育、伦理、法律和社会的重要问题,这些问题需要从本地、本国、国际等不同层面加以考虑。在第七次及以前历次筑波国际生命伦理学圆桌会议的讨论结束之后,在《优巴斯亚洲及国际生命伦理学杂志》陈述了其目标之后,在该杂志上的不同观点争论了十年之后,优巴斯伦理研究所和在本宣言上签名的人士,希望对国际生命伦理学强调下述原则：     

Stem cell research: a target article collection: Part I--Jordan's banks,a view from the first years of human embryonic stem cell research

This essay will address the ethical issues that have emerged in the first considerations of the newly emerging stem cell technology. Many of us in the field of bioethics were deliberating related issues as we first learned of the new science and confronted the ethical issues it raised. In this essay, I will draw on the work of colleagues who were asked to reflect on the early stages of the research (members of the IRBs, the Geron Ethicist Advisory Board, and the National Bioethics Advisory Commission) as the field debated the issues of consent, moral status, use of animal tissues, abortion, use of fetal tissue, and the nature and goals of entrepreneurial research. In this new capacity, ethicists weighed the problem of privacy, the role of justice considerations, and the issues of the marketplace in science. At this point, it is clear that far more issues remain unresolved than are settled, that there is largely unexplored territory ahead, and that the single most important task that faces us as a field is a steady call for ongoing conversation and public debate.     

Stem cell research: a target article collection: Part III--determining moral status

In this chapter, I review some of the background thinking concerning matters of moral status that I had developed in previous years and that I would now bring to the work of the Human Embryo Research Panel. Two ideas were at the forefront of my thinking. First, that biology usually offers not decisive "events" but only continuous processes of development. Second, in making status determinations we do not so much "identify" a point on a developmental continuum where moral respect should be accorded as "choose" that point. These choices are "balancing decisions" in which the community of moral agents weighs its interests in protecting an entity against the burdens of doing so. After illustrating these two contentions, I consider some of the reasons why thinkers on the "right" and "left" of our bioethics debates have resisted or missed this basic insight.