The preembryo as potential: a reply to John A. Robertson.

...In conclusion, let me agree with Robertson that reasonable persons may indeed disagree on concrete conclusions touching preembryo freezing, discard, research, and diagnosis. But it is one of the challenges to reasonable people to give reasons for their conclusions. When Robertson notes that preembryo research "has been found acceptable by most bodies that have examined the subject," he leaves unstated the fact that many of these bodies have not given reasons for their conclusions. This is especially true of the Warnock Committee. It is definitely not true of John Robertson. He has attempted to give analytic support for his rather permissive positions. I find this support too fragile for its assigned task, though I hasten to say that this does not mean that only a totally prohibitive position is defensible or is mine. Prima facie still means prima facie.     

What Really Happened: A Tribute to John C. Fletcher

John C. Fletcher, a pioneer in the field of bioethics and friend and mentor to many generations of bioethicists, died tragically on May 27th at the age of 72. The son of an Episcopal priest from Bryan, TX, Fletcher graduated in 1953 with a degree in English Literature from the University of the South in Sewanee, TN. After completing a Masters in Divinity degree from the Virginia Theological Seminary and a stint as a Fulbright scholar at the University of Heidelberg in 1956, he was ordained in the Episcopal Church and received a doctorate in Christian ethics from the Union Theological Seminary in New York. After ordination, Fletcher worked in various Episcopal churches and founded the Interfaith Metropolitan Theological Seminary in Washington, D.C. However, despite his religious faith, he was also a skeptic, and renounced his ordination in the mid-1990s due to his need for ‘intellectual honesty.’

Fletcher began his bioethics contributions in the early 1970's, when he became a founding Fellow of the Hastings Center and eventually the first Chief of the Bioethics Program at the Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health. At the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, he was the Founding Director of the Center for Bioethics and a professor of biomedical ethics at the medical school, and became the Kornfeld Professor of Biomedical Ethics until his retirement in 1999. Fletcher was a prominent authority and voice in the national and international bioethical dialogue through his talks, his testimonies before scientific and congressional panels, his many articles, and his bioethical and religiously-orientated books, including: An Introduction to Clinical Ethics (1997), Coping with Genetic Disorders: a Guide for Clergy and Parents (1982), Ethics and Human Genetics: A Cross-Cultural Perspective (1989), which he wrote with sociologist Dorothy C. Wertz. Dr. Fletcher received the Lifetime Achievement Award from the American Society of Bioethics and Humanities in 2000. With the passing of Dr. John C. Fletcher, bioethics has lost one of its great voices, a dedicated teacher and mentor, and a friend and colleague to scholars in bioethics and a host of other fields. Below is a touching tribute from one of his former students.     

The plausibility of the implausible: A critique of Snyder and Swann (1978)

Snyder and Swann (1978) advance an argument that individuals display a cognitive bias in testing hypotheses about the personal attributes of other people, i.e. they seek out information which is supportive of their hypothesis (hypothesis-confirming strategy). It is argued here that these authors confound the hypothesis a person might entertain (belief) with a hypothesis the person is asked to test (assigned task). The findings of two experimental studies in which task and belief were manipulated independently suggest that Snyder and Swann's (1978) results are due to the task manipulation and not to an hypothesis-confirming bias.     

John W. Hinckley, Jr.: A Case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder

This article is about John W. Hinckley, Jr., whose attempt to assassinate President Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981 was unsuccessful and whose trial in 1982 resulted in a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity. It focuses on the view of psychiatric experts that he has a narcissistic personality disorder and on the fact that this diagnosis is the primary rationale for his continuing confinement to St. Elizabeth’s Hospital in Washington, D.C. I conclude that the question of his release raises the difficult issue of the possible conflict between justice and care.