-
2Compromise and moral complicity in the embryonic stem cell debateIn Nafsika Athanassoulis (ed.), Philosophical reflections on medical ethics, Palgrave-macmillan. 2005.
-
91Assisted reproductive technological blunders (ARTBs)Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (4): 205-206. 2003.When things go wrong with assisted reproduction we should look at what’s best for everyone in the particular circumstancesA RTBs, as we must now call them, are becoming more and more frequent. In the recent United Kingdom case Mr and Mrs A, a “white” couple, gave birth to twins described as “black”. The mix up apparently occurred because a Mr and Mrs B, a “black” couple, were being treated in the same clinic and Mrs A’s eggs were fertilised with Mr B’s sperm. Mr and Mrs A love the twins and wish…Read more
-
102Organ procurement: dead interests, living needsJournal of Medical Ethics 29 (3): 130-134. 2003.Cadaver organs should be automatically availableThe shortage of donor organs and tissue for transplantation constitutes an acute emergency which demands radical rethinking of our policies and radical measures. While estimates vary and are difficult to arrive at there is no doubt that the donor organ shortage costs literally hundreds of thousands of lives every year. “In the world as a whole there are an estimated 700 000 patients on dialysis . . .. In India alone 100 000 new patients present wit…Read more
-
55Consent and end of life decisionsJournal of Medical Ethics 29 (1): 10-15. 2003.This paper discusses the role of consent in decision making generally and its role in end of life decisions in particular. It outlines a conception of autonomy which explains and justifies the role of consent in decision making and criticises some misapplications of the idea of consent, particular the role of fictitious or “proxy” consents.Where the inevitable outcome of a decision must be that a human individual will die and where that individual is a person who can consent, then that decision …Read more
-
9Commentary on Skene and Parker: the role of a church (or other ideologically based interest group) in developing the law—a plea for ethereal interventionJournal of Medical Ethics 28 (4): 219-220. 2002.This paper discusses the provocative views of Skene and Parker as to the role of religious or other ideologically based interest groups in law and policy making. We draw distinctions between doctrine and prejudice and between argument and ideology which we trust take the debate further. Finally we recommend an ethereal, democratic, and populist partial solution.
-
17One principle and a fourth fallacy of disability studiesJournal of Medical Ethics 28 (3): 204-204. 2002.This brief paper shows that the idea of benefits to the subject compensating for the harms of disability is at best self defeating and at worst sinister. Equally benefits to third parties while real are dubious as compensating factors. This shows that disabilities are just that, a net loss and not a net gain
-
59One principle and three fallacies of disability studiesJournal of Medical Ethics 27 (6): 383-387. 2001.My critics in this symposium illustrate one principle and three fallacies of disability studies. The principle, which we all share, is that all persons are equal and none are less equal than others. No disability, however slight, nor however severe, implies lesser moral, political or ethical status, worth or value. This is a version of the principle of equality. The three fallacies exhibited by some or all of my critics are the following: Choosing to repair damage or dysfunction or to enhance fu…Read more
-
Transhumanity : A moral vision of the twenty-first centuryIn N. Ann Davis, Richard Keshen & Jeff McMahan (eds.), Ethics and humanity: themes from the philosophy of Jonathan Glover, Oxford University Press. 2010.
-
3CloningIn R. G. Frey & Christopher Heath Wellman (eds.), A Companion to Applied Ethics, Wiley-blackwell. 2003.This chapter contains sections titled: Process The Reaction to Cloning Arguments against Human Reproductive Cloning Procreative Autonomy Acknowledgments.
-
3Reproductive choiceIn Rosamond Rhodes, Leslie Francis & Anita Silvers (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to Medical Ethics, Blackwell. 2007.The prelims comprise: Reproductive Choice and Reproductive Autonomy The Limits of Reproductive Autonomy The Right to Reproduce? Who Should Be Provided with Assistance to Reproduce? Reproductive Choices in Pregnancy Future Reproductive Choices Conclusions Notes References.
-
59Ethics and Synthetic GametesBioethics 19 (2): 146-166. 2005.The recent in vitro derivation of gamete‐like cells from mouse embryonic stem (mES) cells is a major breakthrough and lays down several challenges, both for the further scientific investigation and for the bioethical and biolegal discourse. We refer here to these cells as gamete‐like (sperm‐like or oocyte‐like, respectively), because at present there is still no evidence that these cells behave fully like bona fide sperm or oocytes, lacking the fundamental proof, i.e. combination with a normally…Read more
-
40Response to “Utilitarianism Shot Down by Its Own Men” by Tuija TakalaCambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 13 (2): 170-178. 2004.In a lively, interesting, and provocative paper Tuija Takala charges Julian Savulescu and me with bringing utilitarianism into disrepute and indeed with attempting to shoot it down, presumably in flames.1 Takala does not mince words. When she suggests that in our writings “utilitarianism is turning into the monster its critics always thought it was”, she is associating herself with those who charge us with propounding, again her words, the “inhumane theory that allows the sacrifice of minorities…Read more
-
65The Welfare of the ChildHealth Care Analysis 8 (1): 27-34. 2000.The interests or welfare of the child are rightly central to anydiscussion of the ethics of reproduction. The problematic nature of thislegitimate concern is seldom, if ever, noticed or if it is, it ismisunderstood. A prominent example of this sort of misunderstandingoccurs in the Department of Health's recent and important `SurrogacyReview' chaired by Margaret Brazier (The Brazier Report) and thesame misunderstanding makes nonsense of at least one provision of theHuman Fertilization and Embryol…Read more
-
88Taking the “Human” Out of Human RightsCambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 20 (1): 9-20. 2011.Human rights are universally acknowledged to be important, although they are, of course, by no means universally respected. This universality has helped to combat racism and sexism and other arbitrary and vicious forms of discrimination. Unfortunately, as we shall see, the universality of human rights is both too universal and not universal enough. It is time to take the “human” out of human rights. Indeed, it is very probable that in the future there will be no more humans as we know them now, …Read more
-
6The Age-Indifference Principle and EqualityCambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 14 (1): 93-99. 2005.The question of whether or not either elderly people or those whose life expectancy is short have commensurately reduced claims on their fellows, have, in short, fewer or less powerful rights than others, is of vital importance but is one that has seldom been adequately examined. Despite ringing proclamations of justice and equality for all, the fact is that most societies discriminate between citizens on the basis both of age and life expectancy.
-
30Justice and Equal Opportunities in Health CareBioethics 13 (5): 392-404. 1999.The principle that each individual is entitled to an equal opportunity to benefit from any public health care system, and that this entitlement is proportionate neither to the size of their chance of benefitting, nor to the quality of the benefit, nor to the length of lifetime remaining in which that benefit may be enjoyed, runs counter to most current thinking about the allocation of resources for health care. It is my contention that any system of prioritisation of the resources available for …Read more
-
107Ignorance, information and autonomyTheoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (5): 415-436. 2001.People have a powerful interest in geneticprivacy and its associated claim to ignorance,and some equally powerful desires to beshielded from disturbing information are oftenvoiced. We argue, however, that there is nosuch thing as a right to remain in ignorance,where a right is understood as an entitlementthat trumps competing claims. This doesnot of course mean that information must alwaysbe forced upon unwilling recipients, only thatthere is no prima facie entitlement to beprotected from true o…Read more
-
29The Method in Bioethics ResearchCambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 16 (4): 366. 2007.American Journal of Bioethics, Bioethics, Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Journal of Medical Ethics, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, Nursing Ethics, Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
-
91Germline Modification and the Burden of Human ExistenceCambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 25 (1): 6-18. 2016.
-
63Does a Fish Need a Bicycle? Animals and Evolution in the Age of BiotechnologyCambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 20 (3): 484-492. 2011.Animals, in the age of biotechnology, are the subjects of a myriad of scientific procedures, interventions, and modifications. They are created, altered, and experimented upon—often with highly beneficial outcomes for humans in terms of knowledge gained and applied, yet not without concern also for the effects upon the experimental subjects themselves: consideration of the use of animals in research remains an intensely debated topic. Concerns for animal welfare in scientific research have, howe…Read more
-
73Taking liberties with free fallJournal of Medical Ethics 40 (6): 371-374. 2014.In his ‘Moral Enhancement, Freedom, and What We Value in Moral Behaviour’,1 David DeGrazia sets out to defend moral bioenhancement from a number of critics, me prominently among them. Here he sets out his stall: "Many scholars doubt what I assert: that there is nothing inherently wrong with MB. Some doubt this on the basis of a conviction that there is something inherently wrong with biomedical enhancement technologies in general. Chief among their objections are the charges that biomedical enha…Read more
-
707Disability, enhancement and the harm -benefit continuumIn John R. Spencer & Antje Du Bois-Pedain (eds.), Freedom and Responsibility in Reproductive Choice, Hart Publishers. 2006.Suppose that you are soon to be a parent and you learn that there are some simple measures that you can take to make sure that your child will be healthy. In particular, suppose that by following the doctor’s advice, you can prevent your child from having a disability, you can make your child immune from a number of dangerous diseases and you can even enhance its future intelligence. All that is required for this to happen is that you (or your partner) comply with lifestyle and dietary requireme…Read more
-
14“Enhancements Are a Moral Obligation” u: Bostrom i SavulescuIn Julian Savulescu & Nick Bostrom (eds.), Human Enhancement, Oxford University Press. pp. 131--155. 2009.
-
1463Enhancements Are A Moral ObligationIn Julian Savulescu & Nick Bostrom (eds.), Human Enhancement, Oxford University Press. 2010.Sobre Filosofia clinica e Reflexões sobre o que é o humano.
-
231‘Ethics is for bad guys!’ Putting the ‘moral’ into moral enhancementBioethics 27 (3): 169-173. 2012.
-
67Embryos and Eagles: Symbolic Value in Research and ReproductionCambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15 (1): 22-34. 2006.On both sides of the debate on the use of embryos in stem cell research, and in reproductive technologies more generally, rhetoric and symbolic images have been evoked to influence public opinion. Human embryos themselves are described as either “very small human beings” or “small clusters of cells.” The intentions behind the use of these phrases are clear. One description suggests that embryos are already members of our community and share with us a right to life or at least respectful treatmen…Read more
Areas of Interest
Philosophy of Biology |
Philosophy of Cognitive Science |