Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

bioethics

 
Dictionary: bi·o·eth·ics   ('ō-ĕth'ĭks) pronunciation
n. (used with a sing. verb)
The study of the ethical and moral implications of new biological discoveries and biomedical advances, as in the fields of genetic engineering and drug research.

bioethical bi'o·eth'i·cal adj.
bioethicist bi'o·eth'i·cist (-ĭ-sĭst) n.

Search unanswered questions...
Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics
Dental Dictionary: bioethics
Top

n

The study of social and moral issues raised in the field of biology, including medicine and dentistry.

Philosophy Dictionary: bioethics
Top

The branch of ethics that investigates problems specifically arising from medical and biological practice. These include problems of the nature and distribution of treatment; the sphere of authority of the patient, the physician, and others; the scope and limits of confidentiality; the limits of acceptable intervention and experimentation (see abortion, euthanasia); and the propriety of genetic research and its applications.

US History Encyclopedia: Bioethics
Top

Bioethics addresses the moral and ethical issues arising from clinical practice, medical and biological re-search, resource allocation, and access to biomedical technology. Van Rensselaer Potter at the University of Wisconsin and Andre Hellegers at the Kennedy Institute of Ethics independently coined the term "bioethics" in the early 1970s to describe different concepts, and its exact definition remains contested today. However, it is nonetheless possible to discern the growth of a professional bioethics industry and discipline intimately tied to cultural mores and new advances in biomedical technology and techniques. Indeed, the field of bioethics underwent explosive growth and institutionalization in the 1970s as challenging issues such as euthanasia, in vitro fertilization, organ transplantation, and genetic engineering attracted the public's attention and concern. Because questions over appropriate science and social policies exist at the crossroads of legal, political, and moral disputes, the history of American bioethics is one of contentious debate, government regulation, and continuing growth.

The history of medical ethics dates to antiquity, and the Hippocratic Oath to "do no harm" remains at the core of modern medical ethics. The American Medical Association (AMA) established a code of ethics in 1846 to regulate medical practice; a hundred years later, revelations about Nazi medical experimentation led to the Nuremberg Code, requiring "informed consent" from human subjects involved in research. In the 1960s the introduction of dialysis machines, and the resulting "God committees" to decide who would receive the life-saving treatments, strained the medical community's ethical consensus. At the same time, a cultural emphasis on individual rights merged with growing concerns over medical and biological advances to require government intervention. For example, the definition of "brain death," the ethics of organ transplantation, and the potential for prenatal genetic discrimination led to the first Senate hearings on bioethics in 1968. These issues also led to the establishment of the Institute of Society, Ethics, and the Life Sciences (also known as the Hastings Center) in 1969; the National Science Foundation's Ethics and Human Values Implications of Science and Technology (EHVIST) program in 1971; and the Joseph and Rose Kennedy Center for the Study of Human Reproduction and Bioethics (later the Kennedy Institute of Ethics) in 1971.

Throughout the 1970s a professional bioethics industry developed in response to numerous ethical and medical dilemmas. The wide assortment of issues attracted attention from diverse groups. Many religious communities felt genetic screening might increase abortions of "defective" babies, while the Roe v. Wade decision and questions regarding fetal research ensured the active participation of women's groups. The disclosure of improper medical conduct and a lack of informed consent in the Tuskegee, Alabama, syphilis study heightened awareness about the regulation and control of research, as the public questioned whether researchers could be trusted with ethical responsibilities. These questions resurfaced in disputes over the morality of "gene splicing" throughout the decade, while the Karen Ann Quinlan case thrust the "right to die" movement into the spotlight. The birth of Louise Brown, the first "test-tube" baby, also ignited public interest, as the government and the public struggled to address the plethora of issues. By 1980, many medical schools had established programs and journals to discuss the challenging new issues and prepare students for their future careers; the first Encyclopedia of Bioethics appeared in 1978.

In 1974 the United States Congress, led by Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy, established the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The commission released a series of reports over the next four years that provided the "official" positions necessary to create uniformity in American policies on the various complex legal and ethical issues. Given the religiously pluralistic fabric of American society, the committee's primary position, as outlined in The Belmont Report, relied on the three principles of beneficence, justice, and autonomy as acceptable, and secular, bioethical guidelines. Early treatises on medical ethics, such as Joseph Fletcher's Morals and Medicine (1954) or Paul Ramsey's The Patient as Person (1970), had often combined Christian theology with a liberal philosophy to help reconsider the doctor-patient relationship in light of the latest medical developments. Indeed, some observers credit the rise of bioethics with revitalizing philosophical ethics, as the new challenges demanded a fresh approach and a resolution.

However, the guidelines failed to quell public uneasiness and led many groups to question the official principles throughout the 1970s and 1980s. Christian fundamentalists and Christian Scientists were especially vocal and litigious in challenging the emphasis on individual autonomy. Critics often charged that the Belmont Report's principles downplayed the importance of community and family and argued against the autonomy of children and mentally handicapped patients in making decisions regarding abortion, euthanasia, or life-saving medical treatments. Similar disagreement followed the 1982 release of the President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Re-search (est. 1980) report Splicing Life because it advocated the patenting of genetically-altered organisms and stated that future debates on biological research could rely on professional bioethicists, rather than theologians, for moral and ethical perspectives.

By the early 2000s bioethics was internationally recognized and interdisciplinary, drawing participants and perspectives from philosophy, medicine, biology, theology, and history. By 1990, over 100 organizations and institutions dedicated to bioethics had been established, many of them in the United States, an acknowledged leader in the field. Indeed, responding to ethical concerns over human gene therapy and experimentation with human subjects, President Bill Clinton established the National Bioethics Advisory Commission in 1996. Chaired by Harold Shapiro, former president of Princeton University, the commission produced the influential report Cloning Human Beings, which outlined the ethical issues related to the emerging technology. The commission's charter expired in October 2001, leaving empty that critical nexus where specialists in medical, clinical, or research ethics could address the latest bioethical developments, from reproductive techniques and access to artificial organs to cloning, stem cell research, and genetic privacy and discrimination. As the sophistication of medical technology and biological research increases, the field of bioethics continues to grow, preparing to meet the unforeseen challenges of the twenty-first century.

Bibliography

Engelhardt, H. T. The Foundations of Bioethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.

Jonsen, Albert R. The Birth of Bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Reich, Warren, ed. The Encyclopedia of Bioethics. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1995.

Stevens, M. L. Bioethics in America: Origins and Cultural Politics. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000.

—J. G. Whitesides

 
Columbia Encyclopedia: bioethics
Top
bioethics, in philosophy, a branch of ethics concerned with issues surrounding health care and the biological sciences. These issues include the morality of abortion, euthanasia, in vitro fertilization, and organ transplants (see transplantation, medical). In the 1970s bioethics emerged as a discipline with its own experts, often professional philosophers, who developed university courses on the subject. Many hospitals now employ experts on bioethics to advise on such issues as how to treat terminally ill patients and to allocate limited resources. Advances in health care, the development of genetic screening, and the new research in genetic engineering, including gene therapy, have also given rise to questions in bioethics.

Bibliography

See W. T. Reich, ed., Encyclopedia of Bioethics (4 vol., 1978); H. T. Engelhardt, The Foundations of Bioethics (1986); R. Macklin, Mortal Choices: Bioethics in Today's World (1987).


Science Dictionary: bioethics
Top

The application of ethics to the science and practice of biology, especially as modern science is applied to human life and reproduction.

  • With the advent of cloning and research on embryonic stem cells, bioethics has become an important branch of scientific inquiry.
  •  
    Blogs: Related blogs on: bioethics
    Top

    Wikipedia: Bioethics
    Top

    Bioethics is the philosophical study of the ethical controversies brought about by advances in biology and medicine. Bioethicists are concerned with the ethical questions that arise in the relationships among life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics, law, philosophy, and theology.

    Contents

    History

    Although bioethical issues have been debated since ancient times, and public attention briefly focused on the role of human subjects in biomedical experiments following the revelation of Nazi experiments conducted during World War II, the modern field of bioethics first emerged as an academic discipline in the 1960s. Technological advances in such diverse areas as organ transplantation and end-of-life care, including the development of kidney dialysis and respirators, posed novel questions regarding when and how care might be withdrawn. These questions often fell upon philosophers and religious scholars, but by the 1970s, bioethical think tanks and academic bioethics programs emerged. Among the earliest such institutions were the Hastings Center (originally known as The Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences), founded in 1969 by philosopher Daniel Callahan and psychiatrist Willard Gaylin, and the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, established at Georgetown University in 1971. The publication of Principles of Biomedical Ethics by James F. Childress and Tom Beauchamp—the first American textbook of bioethics—marked a transformative moment in the discipline.

    During the subsequent three decades, bioethical issues gained widespread attention through the court cases surrounding the deaths of Karen Ann Quinlan, Nancy Cruzan and Terri Schiavo. The field developed its own cadre of widely-known advocates, such as Al Jonsen at the University of Washington, John Fletcher at the University of Virginia, Jacob M. Appel at Brown University, Ruth Faden at Johns Hopkins University, and Arthur Caplan at the University of Pennsylvania. In 1995, President Bill Clinton established the President’s Council on Bioethics, a sign that the field had finally reached an unprecedented level of maturity and acceptance. President George W. Bush also relied upon a Council on Bioethics in rendering decisions in areas such as the public funding of embryonic stem-cell research.

    Purpose and scope

    The field of bioethics addresses a broad swath of human inquiry, ranging from debates over the boundaries of life (eg. abortion, euthanasia) to the allocation of scarce health care resources (eg. organ donation, health care rationing) to the right to turn down medical care for religious or cultural reasons. Bioethicists often disagree among themselves over the precise limits of their discipline, debating whether the field should concern itself with the ethical evaluation of all questions involving biology and medicine, or only a subset of these questions. Some bioethicists would narrow ethical evaluation only to the morality of medical treatments or technological innovations, and the timing of medical treatment of humans. Others would broaden the scope of ethical evaluation to include the morality of all actions that might help or harm organisms capable of feeling fear and pain, and include within bioethics all such actions if they bear a relation to medicine and biology. However, most bioethicists share a commitment to discussing these complex issues in an honest, civil and intelligent way, using tools from the many different disciplines that "feed" the field to produce meaningful frameworks for analysis.

    Principles

    One of the first areas addressed by modern bioethicists was that of human experimentation. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research was initially established in 1974 to identify the basic ethical principles that should underlie the conduct of biomedical and behavioral research involving human subjects. However, the fundamental principles announced in the Belmont Report (1979)--namely, autonomy, beneficence and justice--have influenced the thinking of bioethicists across a wide range of issues. Others have added non-maleficence, human dignity and the sanctity of life to this list of cardinal values.

    Perspectives and methodology

    Bioethicists come from a wide variety of backgrounds and have training in a diverse array of disciplines. The field contains individuals trained in philosophy such as Peter Singer of Princeton University and Daniel Brock of Harvard University, medically-trained clinician ethicists such as Mark Siegler of the University of Chicago and Joseph Fins of Cornell University, lawyers such as Jacob Appel and Wesley J. Smith, political economists like Francis Fukuyama, and theologians including James Childress. The field, once dominated by formally trained philosophers, has become increasingly interdisciplinary, with some critics even claiming that the methods of analytic philosophy have had a negative effect on the field's development. Leading journals in the field include the Hastings Center Report, the Journal of Medical Ethics and the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics.

    Many religious communities have their own histories of inquiry into bioethical issues and have developed rules and guidelines on how to deal with these issues from within the viewpoint of their respective faiths. The Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths have each developed a considerable body of literature on these matters. In the case of many non-Western cultures, a strict separation of religion from philosophy does not exist. In many Asian cultures, for example, there is a lively discussion on bioethical issues. Buddhist bioethics, in general, is characterised by a naturalistic outlook that leads to a rationalistic, pragmatic approach. Buddhist bioethicists include Damien Keown. In India, Vandana Shiva is the leading bioethicist speaking from the Hindu tradition. In Africa, and partly also in Latin America, the debate on bioethics frequently focusses on its practical relevance in the context of underdevelopment and geopolitical power relations.

    See also

    Issues

    Areas of health sciences that are the subject of published, peer-reviewed bioethical analysis include:

    References and further reading

    General Bioethics

    Christian bioethics

    • Colson, Charles W. (ed.) (2004). Human Dignity in the Biotech Century: A Christian Vision for Public Policy. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press. ISBN 0830827838
    • Demy, Timothy J. and Gary P. Stewart. (1998). Suicide: A Christian Response: Crucial Considerations for Choosing Life. Grand Rapids: Kregel. ISBN 0825423554
    • Pope John Paul II. (1995). Evangelium Vitae: The Gospel of Life. New York: Random House. ISBN 0812926714
    • Kilner, John et al. (1995). Bioethics and the Future of Medicine: A Christian Appraisal. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. ISBN 0802840817
    • Kilner, John F., Arlene B. Miller, and Edmund D. Pellegrino (eds.). (1996). Dignity and Dying: A Christian Appraisal. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co.; and Carlisle, United Kingdom: Paternoster Press. ISBN 0802842321
    • Meilaender, Gilbert (2004). Bioethics: A Primer For Christians. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. ISBN 0802842348
    • Loudovikos, Nikolaos, Protopresbyter (2002). The Individualization of Death and Euthanasia, Holy Synod of the Church of Greece, Committee of Bioethics, Scientific Conference on Euthanasia (Athens, May 17-18, 2002), retrieved on February 27, 2009. (Article in Greek).
    • Pope Paul VI. (1968). Humanae Vitae: Human Life. Vatican City.
    • Smith, Wesley J. (2004). Consumer's Guide to A Brave New World. San Francisco: Encounter Books. ISBN 1893554996
    • Smith, Wesley J. (2000). Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America. San Francisco: Encounter Books. ISBN 1893554066
    • Smith, Wesley J. (1997). Forced Exit: The Slippery Slope from Assisted Suicide to Murder. New York: Times Books. ISBN 0812927907
    • Stewart, Gary P. et al. (1998). Basic Questions on Suicide and Euthanasia: Are They Ever Right? BioBasics Series. Grand Rapids: Kregel. ISBN 0825430720
    • Stewart, Gary P. et al. (1998). Basic Questions on End of Life Decisions: How Do We Know What's Right? Grand Rapids: Kregel. ISBN 0825430704
    • Westphal, Euler Renato. O Oitavo dia – na era da seleção artificial (See The Eighth Day (book) Review) . 1. ed. São Bento do Sul: União Cristã, 2004. v. 01. 125 p. ISBN 85-87485-18-0

    Jewish bioethics

    • Bleich, J. David. (1981). Judaism and Healing. New York: Ktav. ISBN 087068891X
    • Dorff, Elliot N. (1998). Matters of Life and Death: A Jewish Approach to Modern Medical Ethics. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society. ISBN 0827606478
    • Feldman DM. (1974). Marital relations, birth control, and abortion in Jewish law. New York: Schocken Books.
    • Freedman B. (1999). Duty and healing: foundations of a Jewish bioethic. New York: Routledge. ISBN 0415921791
    • Jakobovits I. (1959). Jewish Medical Ethics. New York: Bloch Publishing.
    • Mackler, Aaron L. (ed.) (2000). Life & Death Responsibilities in Jewish Biomedical Ethics. New York: JTS. ISBN 0873340817.
    • Maibaum M. "A 'progressive' Jewish medical ethics: notes for an agenda" in Journal of Reform Judaism 1986;33(3):27-33.
    • Rosner, Fred. (1986). Modern medicine and Jewish ethics. New York: Yeshiva University Press. ISBN 0881250910
    • Conservative Judaism Vol. 54(3), Spring 2002 (contains a set of six articles on bioethics)
    • Zohar, Noam J. (1997). Alternatives in Jewish Bioethics. Albany: State University of New York Press. ISBN 0791432734

    Muslim bioethics

    • Al Khayat MH. "Health and Islamic behaviour" in: El Gindy AR, editor, Health policy, ethics and human values: Islamic perspective. Kuwait: Islamic Organization of Medical Sciences; 1995. p. 447-50.
    • Ebrahim, Abul Fadl Mohsin. (1989). Abortion, Birth Control and Surrogate Parenting. An Islamic Perspective. Indianapolis. ISBN 0892590815
    • Esposito, John. (ed.) (1995). "Surrogate Motherhood" in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World (vol. 4). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195096150
    • Karic, Enes. "The Ethics of Cloning" in Islamica Magazine Fall/Winter 2004. Issue #11

    Buddhist bioethics

    • Florida, R. E. (1994) Buddhism and the Four Principles in Principles of Health Care Ethics, ed. R. Gillon and A. Lloyd, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 105-16.
    • Keown, Damien. (1995) Buddhism & Bioethics. London and New York: Macmillan/St. Martins Press.

    Hindu bioethics

    • Coward, H. G., J. J. Lipner, and K. K. Young. (1989) Hindu Ethics: Purity, Abortion, and Euthanasia. Albany: State University of New York Press.
    • Crawford, S. C. (2003) Hindu bioethics for the Twenty-first Century. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
    • Crawford, S. C. (1995) Dilemmas of Life and Death, Hindu Ethics in A North American Context 1995. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
    • Firth, S. (2005) End-of-life: a Hindu view. The Lancet. 366(9486): 682-686.
    • Lakhan, Shaheen. (2008) Hinduism: life and death. Student BMJ. 16(18):310-311.

     
     

     

    Copyrights:

    Dictionary. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2007, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.  Read more
    Dental Dictionary. Mosby's Dental Dictionary. Copyright © 2004 by Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.  Read more
    Philosophy Dictionary. The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Copyright © 1994, 1996, 2005 by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.  Read more
    US History Encyclopedia. © 2006 through a partnership of Answers Corporation. All rights reserved.  Read more
    Columbia Encyclopedia. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright © 2003, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/cup/ Read more
    Science Dictionary. The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition Edited by E.D. Hirsch, Jr., Joseph F. Kett, and James Trefil. Copyright © 2002 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin. All rights reserved.  Read more
    Answers Corporation Blogs. © 1999-2009 by Answers Corporation. All rights reserved.  Read more
    Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Bioethics" Read more