Embryos created for research purposes.

The creation of embryos for research use has drawn a great deal of criticism. It is difficult to defend an ethical distinction between what one can do to "spare" embryos and what one can do to "research" embryos. The strongest ground on which to argue against the creation of embryos for research is a symbolic one, having to do with respect for human life. Ronald Dworkin's work in Life's Dominion on the symbolic meaning of the abortion debate throws a helpful light on this dispute. By understanding the basic question to be, Does the creation of research embryos weaken or insult our communal respect for the sanctity of human life in some way that in vitro fertilization (IVF) or the experimental use of "spare" embryos does not?, the debate can move in a more constructive direction.     

Mentoring for Responsible Research: The Creation of a Curriculum for Faculty to Teach RCR in the Research Environment

Despite more than 25 years of a requirement for training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR), there is still little consensus about what such training should include, how it should be delivered, nor what constitutes “effectiveness” of such training. This lack of consensus on content, approaches and outcomes is evident in recent data showing high variability in the development and implementation of RCR instruction across universities and programs. If we accept that one of the primary aims of instruction in RCR/research ethics is “to foster a community of social responsibility” (Antes et al. 2009: 398), then it makes sense to consider the research environment itself—where learning one’s science happens where one also engages in social interaction around that science. In order to take the best advantage of that already existing/naturally occurring research environment, the authors, through a deliberative, collaborative, and integrative process, crafted a workshop curriculum meant to arm research faculty with concrete and specific tools to effectively introduce research ethics in the context of the research environment.     

Standards of Scientific Conduct: Disciplinary Differences

Teaching of responsible conduct of research is largely predicated on the assumption that there are accepted standards of conduct that can be taught. However there is little evidence of consensus in the scientific community about such standards, at least for the practices of authorship, collaboration, and data management. To assess whether such differences in standards are based on disciplinary differences, a survey, described previously, addressing standards, practices, and perceptions about teaching and learning was distributed in November 2010 to US faculty from 50 graduate programs for the biomedical disciplines of microbiology, neuroscience, nursing, and psychology. Despite evidence of statistically significant differences across the four disciplines, actual differences were quite small. Stricter measures of effect size indicated practically significant disciplinary differences for fewer than 10 % of the questions. This suggests that the variation in individual standards of practice within each discipline is at least as great as variation due to differences among disciplines. Therefore, the need for discipline-specific training may not be as important as sometimes thought.     

Does intra-individual change predict offender recidivism? Searching for the Holy Grail in assessing offender change

Offender rehabilitation effectively reduces recidivism for treatment groups compared to control groups, but there is less evidence demonstrating that intra-individual changes are related to reductions in risk. We review and critique academic and government literature linking individual change scores to recidivism, focusing on three key treatment domains: cognition, violence, and substance misuse. Database searches identified 378 studies measuring change, but only 53 studies yielding 49 explicit tests of the relationship between intra-individual change scores and recidivism outcome. Of the 49 available tests, 26 effect sizes (53.1%) were significant, ranging from small (d = 0.06) to large (d = 1.48). Across all domains, change variables significantly related to recidivism included known dynamic risk factors: antisocial attitudes, antisocial beliefs, antisocial associates, antisocial personality, social support, and substance misuse. Two additional findings centered on changes in negative emotion and successful treatment process. This review further suggests there is a need to utilize better measurement strategies and more sophisticated constructs. Additional practical, theoretical, and methodological implications are discussed.     

Cochlear implants and the claims of culture? A response to Lane and Grodin

Because I reject the notion that physical characteristics constitute cultural membership, I argue that, even if the claim were persuasive that deafness is a culture rather than a disability, there is no reason to fault hearing parents who choose cochlear implants for their deaf children.     

Children with AIDS in the public schools: The ethical issues

The question of whether to allow children with AIDS to attend public school generates explosive emotions and has wide-reaching consequences. This paper focuses on the perspective of parents of well children who may be asked to attend school with children who have AIDS. These parents are poised at the heart of the dilemma: they are the ethical “bottom line,” and an argument that fails to satisfy them ought not to satisfy anyone. The conflicting commitments these parents face are first to the parentchild covenant which requires them to act in their child's best interests, and second, to the principles of beneficence and justice, which require them not to further burden a sick child with ostracism and isolation. Almost exact parallels exist between this issue and that of proxy consent by parents for children's participation in low-risk, non-therapeutic research. The lengthy and important debate between Paul Ramsey and Richard McCormick on this question is analyzed, concluding that McCormick's position in favor of thoughtful proxy consent is the more compelling. Returning to the question of allowing children with AIDS to attend school, the essay shows why the parallels are persuasive. On the ethical level, the apparent conflict of obligations is almost exactly the same; on the pragmatic level, the essay shows why sharing a classroom with a child who has AIDS is comparable to the “low-risk” category that the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects found acceptable in its 1978 guidelines. The essay concludes that parents of healthy childrenmay and ought to accept the presence of children with AIDS in the public school.