http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e9/thumb_daniel_callahan.jpg/220px-thumb_daniel_callahan.jpg...
TRANSCRIPT
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e9/Thumb_Daniel_Callahan.jpg/220px-Thumb_Daniel_Callahan.jpg
Intro to Bioethics
Emerged in 50’s-60’s
Modern detail due to new technology advances (e.g. the pill, abortion, dialysis, transplants) At same time as awareness of dangers of “pure progress” (e.g.
Silent Spring) Also civil rights Time of increased individualism and choices Affirmative right to health (not just absence of disease) Reframing of who has rights
But still all about the same old questions Life and death Pain and suffering Duty to others
Other Historical Context
Eugenics Eugenics movement big in US
Anti-miscegenation laws Margaret Sanger Forced sterilizations of the “unfit”
Also big with Nazis…
Experiments on prisoners and disabled
Colonialism
Other Historical Context: Tuskegee Experiment
Ran from 1932-1972~400 poor, rural African-American men with
syphilis (200 w/o)Offered free medical careNot told about or treated for syphilisPenicillin available in 1940, standard by 1947Wanted to see progress of disease
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment
The field…
Ethics meets life sciences (medicine)An academic field of its ownProvides cultural perspectiveAffects law, policy, media, culture, other
disciplinesStruggles to be taken seriously…. But is
contributing
Bioethics gets at….
Tension between individual and private Large scale policy/legislation
Tries to answer questions about what we should do Applied at different levels
Historically
Idea that science/medicine = fact/ truth/ solid/ authoritative ethics = soft/ relativistic/ personal/ idiosyncratic And that these are separate
Then a good medical decision = a good moral decision
Goal of bioethics is to blur that line Develop tools/methods to deal with problems Different from “medical ethics”
Questions
How can I be moral and act morally to others?
What do I base this on? Virtue v. duty? Principles? Rights? (deontology) Consequences (utilitarianism) Whose freedom/choice gets prioritized Top-down v. bottom-up
Feminist Bioethics
http://www.upne.com/author_mugs/steinbergdavid_mug.jpg
A little more on Bioethics
Hard to define but about values and promoting them About right and wrong
Says that fact that we don’t know how to deal with conflict is evidence that Bioethics is not as solid as science
But decisions have to be made and we need to know how to deal with them
About a common morality
Different Philosophies
Utilitarianism – consequences
Deontologism – logically derived rules from principles
Principalism – morality based on autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and justice
http://www.lifesitenews.com/images/sized/images/news/peter-singer-400x276.jpg
Animals?
Non-human animal ethics is based on assertion that animals feel pain and are conscious General agreement (science + experience)
Therefore a general assumption that procedures that hurt people also hurt animals
Context and History
Lots of animals used in experimental work >22 million/year as of 1986 Mice, rats, cats, dogs, rabbits, primates, pigs….
Toxicity testing Until late 80’s, LD50 was standard for everything Also Draize eye test consumer backlash
Military Relatively undocumented (and unregulated) Monkey radiation
Psych research Big exposés a Penn about monkey studies
Dissection Out of favor, more alternatives
Guidelines
Most countries have some protectionCIOMSMost institutions have committees/codes
In defense of….
Leads to breakthroughsAdvances knowledge and disease curesMostly harmless studiesLots for vet purposes Justifications:
Benefit to humans > harm to animals Knowledge > harm
So….
If we believe (as we do now) that this doesn’t justify harm to non-consenting adults, we have to establish a different moral status of humans and non-human animals.
Some positions….
Biblical We have domain (but we are also the shepherds)
Animals don’t have rights Are not moral (rational) agents capable of autonomous
action Therefore we only have moral obligation to those who
can reciprocateContract based on species membership
Utilitarianism Applied
Benefit to human life span is worth it Bypass graft example
Genuine utilitarianism looks at all pain Need a human-centric flavor
Inconsistent to not use for lab work but to use for food?
The range of anti’s
Abolitionists Ends don’t justify means Pain/death of an innocent is wrong Hard for many to be absolute if outcome is important
enoughReformers
Ok if we change practices and benefit good enough Promote alternate methods The 3 R’s
Reduction Refinement Replacement
Moral Status
We don’t draw ethical boundary at speciesNot just about abilitySpeciesism analogous to racism
Intelligence argument is a slippery slopeNot claiming all interests are equal, but all
should be consideredNeed to examine assumption that restricting
animal research impedes science
CIOMS