Click here for a deeper conversation on this topic led by Hastings Director of Research Josephine Johnston.
Health care in America is at a critical juncture. The number of people who need it continues to grow and costs have skyrocketed. But instead of being a beacon of healing, many health care organizations are beleaguered and overwhelmed. Burnout has become a rallying cry for nurses and doctors because it impedes their ability to uphold the foundational values of their professions and to serve in accordance with them. These realities have eroded the fundamental humanity of health care.
BIOETHICS FORUM ESSAY
When the rapper T. I. disclosed on a podcast that he takes his 18-year-old daughter to a yearly gynecological examination to ensure that her hymen is still intact, the reaction of most people was condemnation. His obsession with her virginity is creepy, his subjecting her to an invasive procedure that has no medical value is controlling, and his willingness to talk about it publicly displays contempt for her rights to privacy and dignity. Some think that the law should prohibit physicians from performing or supervising virginity examinations. But the law is not the best means for dealing with the problem, and the problem is not simply virginity testing.
The bioethics and legal communities must come together to find ways to move with the same ease of the scientific research community–to transcend the geopolitical borders and jurisdictional concerns that make international regulation so difficult.
Professionals and the public in China first learned of the jail sentence of He Jiankui from the report of Xinhua News Agency. No information, including any interpretation, was provided by the Court. But the reported words of the sentence are so ambiguous as to leave room for different interpretations. We believe that the public has the right to know more than Xinhua News Agency reported.
An essay for Bioethics Forum earlier this month concludes that medical aid in dying is not a human right. But we should have a right to decide what suffering we are willing to endure and receive medical assistance necessary to avoid the suffering we want to avoid.
What is Don Quixote, Cervantes’ 17th-century Spanish “Ingenious Gentleman of La Mancha,” doing in a 21st-century novel about America? He’s on a quest to wed his Beloved. And what does this obsession have to do with the present-day opioid epidemic? Salman Rushdie’s new novel Quichotte links these unlikely events and much more. The opioid… Read more
A New York Times special report on euthanasia of a Paralympics champion in Belgium was ethically problematic for several reasons.
The American species of the common house mouse (Mus musculus) does an odd thing when going through opioid withdrawal. It jumps involuntarily, rearing up on its hind legs and leaping 3-to-4 feet in the air. I was a spectator to this phenomenon this summer, while working at a research hospital in New York City.
The Kings County Medical Society in New York recently hosted a brunch with New York State legislators. One of the guests was Richard Gottfried, chair of the New York State Assembly Health Committee, who is cosponsoring A2694, a bill legalizing medical aid in dying (MAID). As a medical oncologist with 30 years’ experience treating seriously ill patients, I have concerns about it, and I expressed them to Gottfried.
Are we ethically obliged to eat less meat? Bioethicists consider that question, and their role in addressing it.
The National Institutes of Health recently announced that it will retire-in-place the remaining 44 chimpanzees at the Alamogordo Primate Facility in Alamogordo, New Mexico, rather than transfer them to a sanctuary as originally planned. NIH’s decision is disappointing for those who believe that the chimpanzees—many of whom have spent decades in research—should experience the freedom and quality of life a sanctuary would provide.
Last week, the Trump Administration proposed a new rule that would “require DNA-sample collection from individuals who are arrested, facing charges, or convicted, and from non-United States persons who are detained under the authority of the United States.” Collecting DNA of people detained under the Department of Homeland Security is not permitted under U.S. law. The proposed rule aims to change that.