SANTO TOMÁS UNIVERSITY

HUMANITIES DEPARTMENT AND INTEGRAL EDUCATION

ENGLISH ACTIVITY

Activity: Articles on bioethics

The activity must be performed as follows:

1. Review the article (using your own words)

2. To make a personal reflection (critically), from the ethics raised by the author
(write from two to three paragraphs)

 Moral Agency and Legal Responsibility

Information

What distinguishes humans from other animals is that we use reason and reflect on our
beliefs, values, expectations and experiences, to make important judgments and decisions -
we are rational. In the absence of such capacities we cannot be held responsible for our
decisions and actions - we would no longer be moral agents. Recent evidence from the
sciences of the mind, particularly cognitive neuroscience, suggests that we may not be as
morally rational as we thought. This raises questions about the scientific and theoretical
foundations of moral agency, which will therefore clearly have normative implications.
Will this change the way we think of ourselves as persons and moral agents? The
neuroscientific data has also refueled some debates central in moral philosophy, particularly
metaethics. How does neuroscientific data bear on these topics, and can it inform those
philosophical debates?

Neurological dysfunction is generally held to be relevant to a defendant’s responsibility for

their actions. Hence when diminished responsibility can be established by appeal to
neurological dysfunction (“neuro-mitigation”), then it is reasonable that the defendant
receives a proportionate punishment. However, the challenge of imputing responsibility is
difficult given the multitude of the deterministic effects of brain function, genetic
predispositions, experience and environment. Hence one ought to ask whether cognitive
neuroscience, amongst other sciences of the mind, will have a bearing on the legal doctrine
of mens rae and thus change our perception of legal responsibility?_
  What is Bioethics?
Information : Online Articles

"Bioethics" has been used in the last twenty years to describe the investigation and a study
of ways in which decisions in medicine and science touch upon our health and lives and
upon our society and environment.

Bioethics is concerned with questions about basic human values such as the rights to life
and health, and the rightness or wrongness of certain developments in healthcare
institutions, life technology, medicine, the health professions and about society's
responsibility for the life and health of its members.

Bioethics involves issues relating to the beginning and end of human life, all the way from
issues relating to in-vitro fertilisation and abortion to euthanasia and palliative care.

Bioethics has an impact on every level of human community from the local nursing home
to the huge international conferences on issues like the Human Genome.

Bioethics is a branch of "applied ethics" and requires the expertise of people working in a
wide range disciplines including: law, philosophy, theology, medicine, the life sciences,
nursing and social science.

Bioethics is full of difficult ethical questions for everybody: families, hospitals,

governments and civilisation.

Fundamental values are at stake: human life, the dignity of the frail and elderly, just
healthcare, bodily integrity and the ability to make reasonable decisions.
  Cloning
Information : Online Articles

Any discussion about cloning needs to begin with careful definitions.  Cloning can occur at
the level of DNA, at the level of the single cell, or at the level of the whole organism. 
Typically, ethical attention is focused upon cloning in the context of the genetic copying of
a whole organism.  While the cloning of non-mammals has occurred in research contexts
for many years, the cloning of the first mammal, Dolly the sheep, surprised many in the
scientific community.  What quickly followed was the cloning of other species and intense
speculation about the possible cloning of humans.  Cloned human embryos have been
produced, but there are no reliable reports that any have been implanted in a woman’s
uterus, let alone developed to birth.  Cloning to birth has come to be called ‘reproductive
cloning’, whereas cloning embryos so that their stem cells may be extracted for possible
research or therapeutic use has come to be called ‘therapeutic cloning’.  The key ethical
issue with therapeutic cloning is the moral status of the cloned embryo, which is created
solely for destruction.  The ethical issues with reproductive cloning include genetic damage
to the clone, health risks to the mother, very low success rate meaning loss of large
numbers of embryos and fetuses, psychological harm to the clone, complex altered familial
relationships, and commodification of human life. 
  Euthanasia
Information : Online Articles

Euthanasia is the intentional and painless taking of the life of another person, by act or
omission, for compassionate motives. The word euthanasia is derived from the Ancient
Greek language and can be literally interpreted as ‘good death.’ Despite its etymology, the
question whether or not euthanasia is in fact a ‘good death’ is highly controversial. Correct
terminology in debates about euthanasia is crucial. Euthanasia may be performed by act or
omission - either by administering a legal drug or by withdrawing basic health care which
normally sustains life (such as food, water or antibiotics). The term euthanasia mostly
refers to the taking of human life on request of that person – the euthanasia is voluntary.
However, euthanasia may also occur without the request of person who subsequently –
euthanasia is non-voluntary. Involuntary euthanasia refers to the taking of a person’s life
against that person’s expressed wish/direction.

Central to discussion on euthanasia is the notion of intention. While death may be caused
by an action or omission of medical staff during treatment in hospital, euthanasia only
occurs if death was intended. For example, if a doctor provides a dying patient extra
morphine with the intention of relieving pain but knowing that his actions may hasten
death, he has not performed euthanasia unless his intention was to cause death (Principle of
Double Effect). Euthanasia may be distinguished from a practice called physician-assisted
suicide, which occurs when death is brought about by the persons own hand (by means
provided to him or her by another person). All practices of euthanasia and physician-
assisted suicide are illegal in Australia.
  Research Ethics
Information : Online Articles : Useful Resources

Research involving people, their data or tissue, requires proper ethical conduct that respects
them and demonstrates responsible conduct which reflects a genuine concern for their
betterment and that of the community.

The values of ethical conduct in research include respect for human beings, justice,
beneficence, research merit and integrity. Respecting human beings, by recognising
everyone’s inherent value and human dignity, ought to govern interactions with research
participants. Doing so shows respect for autonomous individuals (who have the capacity to
make decisions and determine their own life) and to protect those who are vulnerable and
unable to express their autonomy. Justice recognises human equality, which involves fairly
distributing the benefits and burdens of research and treating all participants fairly.
Beneficence in research involves the consideration and awareness of possible harms and
benefits to the participants and their community.

Merit and integrity in research is essential for any research to be ethically justified –
research must show that it is a potential benefit to the community by improving
understanding or knowledge, that the research is well designed to achieve the proposed
aims, is conducted honestly and respectfully, and upholds fundamental medical research
principles.

Ethical research must always identify, gauge and minimise any risks that pose a threat to
participants and their communities. Risks may be managed or justified by the potential
benefit of the research.

Voluntary, non-coerced consent is required, based on a person’s autonomous capacity to be

involved in research. This demonstrates that they have made a voluntary choice based on
understanding information regarding the study. Some studies may involve participants
unable to provide informed consent. These special cases include pregnant women and the
human foetus in utero or ex utero, embryos, children and some disabled people. Guidelines
for ethical considerations specific to participants can be found in the National Statement on
Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (NHMRC).

 
  Neuroethics
Information : Online Articles

Neuroethics is a field of inquiry that is very broad in scope and is closely related to both
cognitive neuroscience and bioethics, though it is now formally recognised as a discipline
in its own right. Neuroethics can be roughly divided into two streams. One stream concerns
the more direct or proximal implications of cognitive neuroscience, which can be referred
to as the “ethics of neuroscience”. It deals with the ethical implications of neuroscientific
knowledge and technology such as enhancing neurological function through novel neuro-
pharmacological, neuro-stimulation and neurogenetic engineering techniques. The
implications of brain imaging technology, which is now commonly used in both research
and medical practice, raises issues concerning mental privacy, diagnostics and predicting
behaviour. Furthermore, knowledge gained through neuroscience, along with brain imaging
technology, may one day allow us to probe the human mind to observe even ones thoughts
and predilections. The second stream of neuroethics, can be referred to as the “neuroscience
of ethics”. This stream of neuroethics lies at the border between philosophy, metaethics and
normative ethics. One of the central issues concerns moral agency. How we impute moral
responsibility given that cognitive neuroscience may shed new light on the way humans
make their decisions as well as the nature of our underlying motivations to act in certain
ways. How can we trust our moral beliefs if it turns out that one’s belief was not the
product of rational contemplation but a post hoc rationalisation of an emotive judgement,
an attitude of disapprobation or a pre-reflective moral intuition that is distinct, impenetrable
and encapsulated from rational contemplation.