•  52
    Non-Professional Healthcare Workers and Ethical Obligations to Work during Pandemic Influenza
    with H. Draper, T. Sorell, J. Ives, S. Damery, S. Greenfield, J. Parry, and J. Petts
    Public Health Ethics 3 (1): 23-34. 2010.
    Most academic papers on ethics in pandemics concentrate on the duties of healthcare professionals. This paper will consider non-professional healthcare workers: do they have a moral obligation to work during an influenza pandemic? If so, is this an obligation that outweighs others they might have, e.g., as parents, and should such an obligation be backed up by the coercive power of law? This paper considers whether non-professional healthcare workers—porters, domestic service workers, catering s…Read more
  •  43
    Genomic databases as global public goods?
    Res Publica 10 (2): 123-134. 2004.
    Recent discussions of genomics and international justice have adopted the concept of ‘global public goods’ to support both the view of genomics as a benefit and the sharing of genomics knowledge across nations. Such discussion relies on a particular interpretation of the global public goods argument, facilitated by the ambiguity of the concept itself. Our aim in this article is to demonstrate this by a close examination of the concept of global public goods with particular reference to its use i…Read more
  •  29
    Clinical ethics: Healthcare workers’ perceptions of the duty to work during an influenza pandemic
    with S. Damery, H. Draper, S. Greenfield, and J. Ives
    Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (1): 12-18. 2010.
    Healthcare workers are often assumed to have a duty to work, even if faced with personal risk. This is particularly so for professionals. However, the health service also depends on non-professionals, such as porters, cooks and cleaners. The duty to work is currently under scrutiny because of the ongoing challenge of responding to pandemic influenza, where an effective response depends on most uninfected HCWs continuing to work, despite personal risk. This paper reports findings of a survey of H…Read more
  •  38
    Social Perspectives and Genetic Enhancement: Whose Perspective? Whose Choice?
    Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 1 (1). 2007.
    Sarah E. Wilson, University of Central LancashireThis paper's account of the core issues at stake in relation to genetic enhancement is presented as an alternative to mainstream liberal defenses of enhancement. The mainstream arguments are identified as being associated with reproductive autonomy, individual choice, and a `neutral', passive interpretation of technology. The alternative account is associated with the perspective of `woman' or child-bearer, with a fundamental concern for social ju…Read more
  •  32
    Understanding preferences for disclosure of individual biomarker results among participants in a longitudinal birth cohort
    with E. R. Baker, A. C. Leonard, M. H. Eckman, and B. P. Lanphear
    Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (12): 736-740. 2010.
    Background To describe the preferences for disclosure of individual biomarker results among mothers participating in a longitudinal birth cohort. Methods We surveyed 343 mothers that participated in the Health Outcomes and Measures of the Environment Study about their biomarker disclosure preferences. Participants were told that the study was measuring pesticide metabolites in their biological specimens, and that the health effects of these low levels of exposure are unknown. Participants were a…Read more