In response to the possibilities for selection created by reproductive technologies like IVF and Prenatal screening, Julian Savulescu has argued that parents have a moral obligation to employ selective technology in order to have the best child that they can possibly have. This idea, which Savulescu has called the Principle of Procreative Beneficence, appears reminiscent of historical eugenics. However, Savulescu has argued that this principle is not eugenic. In this paper I argue that there are good reasons to think that the Principle of Procreative Beneficence is eugenic. Specifically, I argue that this principle shares five common features with historical eugenics which justify the conclusion that it is eugenic. However, while I argue that this principle is eugenic, I argue that it is not morally problematic for that reason because the shared features of historical eugenics and the Principle of Procreative Beneficence, which justify the claim that the principle is eugenic, are not morally problematic. / Thesis (Master, Philosophy) -- Queen's University, 2012-10-08 22:23:59.333

Medical decision making is complicated and requires a full understanding of the options being presented. It is easy as a practitioner to assume that a patient has capacity, when in fact they might not. Evidence indicates that frequently with the best intentions, health care practitioners allow people to make medical decisions when they do not understand the implications of that choice. I believe that this happens when practitioners feel that the patient is autonomously making a choice that promotes beneficence. This too creates an ethical dilemma, as it does not fully promote autonomy if the patient does not have capacity to make the decision. I believe that further reflection can help physicians understand what motivates their patient’s, and their own, decision making. / Urban Bioethics

When it comes to potential children, is to love them to leave them be (nonexistent)? I examine the possibility of virtuous reproduction, as well as some more basic theoretical issues surrounding the nature of moral goodness and obligation generally. Currently, there is a large body of literature in the field of reproductive ethics on questions of what considerations and practices ought to guide reproductive decision-making. The appropriate use of testing technologies to inform such decision-making, for instance, has been widely debated. Much smaller and less visible is the debate surrounding the prior question of whether reproduction itself is morally appropriate or desirable. I am particularly interested in how consequentialist strategies for including considerations of beneficence in reproductive decision-making have shaped moral approaches to reproduction. The principle of procreative beneficence (PPB), which mandates potential reproducers to select the best possible child, highlights the problematic nature of these strategies. The limited conceptual resources and problematic normative foundations of such strategies have stymied the development of a robust discussion on the ethics of reproduction itself. Other types of ethical approaches, loosely defined as deontological, offer superior accounts of what is at issue in reproduction, but also draw on some flawed background assumptions regarding, for instance, the nature of the moral agent and the scope of the moral sphere. The question of the morality of reproduction itself thus leads to an examination of far more basic issues in ethical theory: namely, the significance of meta-ethical commitments, and the desirability of a normative framework that offers a rich and agent-focused account of moral goodness and badness. I argue that a virtue-centred ethics, grounded in neo-Aristotelian naturalism, accomplishes just that. And it is well-equipped to provide a meaningful and helpful analysis of the morality of reproduction, both holistically, in terms of the potential virtuousness of reproduction generally, and in terms of how the virtues of courage and benevolence may be expressed in reproduction. I conclude that a virtue-centred assessment of reproduction offers a sound and practical form of evaluation and that a virtuous character may indeed be expressed through reproduction. / Thesis (Ph.D, Philosophy) -- Queen's University, 2013-09-17 10:44:50.827

This dissertation clarifies a challenge present in Peter Singer's famine-relief argument and offers a new account of our moral duties of rescue. The challenge, in essence, is to differentiate two classes of idealized rescue scenarios where one faces the opportunity to rescue someone from serious peril, and to differentiate them in way that both avoids a shockingly demanding conclusion and effectively counteracts the suspicion that one is maintaining and merely rationalizing a self-serving position. To meet this challenge I provide an account whereby both the extent and the limits of our rescue duties are determined in ways that are plausibly continuous with moral and practical norms more generally. / Philosophy

Submitted by Edileide Reis (leyde-landy@hotmail.com) on 2013-04-15T14:16:51Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Fraga.pdf: 1106693 bytes, checksum: 21456d6474e5d1db8e993e3543972a33 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Rodrigo Meirelles(rodrigomei@ufba.br) on 2013-05-09T17:37:24Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Fraga.pdf: 1106693 bytes, checksum: 21456d6474e5d1db8e993e3543972a33 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2013-05-09T17:37:24Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Fraga.pdf: 1106693 bytes, checksum: 21456d6474e5d1db8e993e3543972a33 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011 / A autora apresenta o problema desta pesquisa: as práticas biotecnológicas de reprodução assistida e terapia gênica podem violar os direitos fundamentais do individuo exigindo dessa maneira a fixação de limites passíveis de utilização prática? A partir da temática: “O conteúdo jurídico do conceito de beneficência estrita em face da experiência neo-eugênica: do limite entre técnicas terapêuticas e reprodutivas e práticas eugênicas da espécie humana” se desenvolveu o objeto deste trabalho a eugenia. O referencial teórico adotado lastreia-se na obra da Cátedra de Derecho y Genoma Humano da Universidade de Deusto em Bilbao Espanha sob a direção do professor Carlos Maria Romeo Casabona da consulta ao periódico da Cátedra a Revista de Derecho y Genoma Humano além dos autores Galton Lacadena Barbas Soutullo Semprini Frankena Vasquez e Rocha. Quanto ao delineamento do estudo a pesquisa se caracteriza como qualitativa no tocante aos procedimentos técnicos se configura como bibliográfica e quanto aos objetivos, sua natureza se apresenta como exploratória. A autora tem como objetivo geral demonstrar que muitas das práticas biotecnológicas adotadas atualmente sob o rótulo de técnicas de reprodução assistida ou de terapia gênica salvaguardadas, portanto pelo manto protetor da ciência apresentam na verdade uma forte conotação neo-eugênica. Assume a hipótese de que se faz necessário estabelecer um limites entre as ações de conseqüências estritamente benéficas emanadas das práticas biomédicas e as práticas eugênicas, o conteúdo jurídico deste conceito na atualidade frente aos diferentes tipos de cultura como também equacionar a maneira através da qual sua aceitabilidade será encarada pela sociedade. Quanto à estrutura o trabalho está ordenado em seis partes incluindo a Introdução e as Conclusões, elencadas progressivamente em número de 18. A autora no Capítulo 2 discorre sobre seu objeto de estudo: a eugenia. Sua proposta é delinear o percurso histórico da ideologia eugênica tradicional analisando a suas concepções e o embasamento teórico que a gerou assim como evidenciar o pensamento de alguns estudiosos defensores do movimento em prol da pureza da raça humana principalmente Francis Galton no Capítulo 3 descreve o fenômeno da disseminação das práticas eugênicas pelo mundo e suas repercussões no Capítulo 4 aborda o surgimento e evolução da genética como disciplina científica, suas conquistas e conseqüentes desdobramentos assim como o recrudescimento experimentado pelas idéias eugênicas a partir do advento da medicina genômica no Capítulo 5 traça o perfil jurídico e o conteúdo do conceito de beneficência estrita elaborado a partir do princípio da beneficência oriundo da doutrina bioética principialista estadunidense que foi desdobrado no sentido de ser admitido não só como obrigação mas também como um dever/direito. / Salvador

The aim of this work is to find out and chart how looks the integration of the Czech secondary-school students to the beneficence in context of the ethical culture at the secondary schools. This work will be focused on the region Mladá Boleslav and the projects Světluška and Píšťalka. The work will be divided into two sections -- theoretical and practical. The theoretical section will contain the questions of the beneficence and two concrete projects, the whole position of the Czech Republic to the beneficence. The practical section will use the question-form method oriented to the secondary-school students. The practical output of this work will be the project - the subject: Ethical Culture at the chosen secondary school.

The doctrine of informed consent, defined as respect for autonomy, is the tool used to govern the relationship between physicians and patients. Its framework relies on rights and duties that mark these relationships. The main purpose of informed consent is to promote human rights and dignity. Some researchers claim that informed consent has successfully replaced patients' historical predispositions to accept physicians' advice without much explicit resistance. Although the doctrine of informed consent promotes ideals worth pursuing, a successful implementation of these ideals in practice has yet to occur. What has happened in practice is that attorneys, physicians, and hospital administrators often use consent forms mainly to protect physicians and medical facilities from liability. Consequently, ethicists, legal theorists, and physicians need to do much more to explain how human rights and human dignity relate to the practice of medicine and how the professionals can promote them in practice. This is especially important because patients' vulnerability has increased just as the complexity and power of medical science and technology have increased. Certain health care practices can shed light on the difficulties of implementing the doctrine of informed consent and explain why it is insufficient to protect patients' rights and dignity. Defining a normal biological event as a disease, and routinely prescribing hormone drug therapy to menopausal women for all health conditions related to menopause, does not meet the standards of free informed consent. Clinicians provide insufficient disclosure about risks related to long-term use of hormone therapies and about the absence of solid evidence to support their bias toward hormone therapies as a treatment of choice for menopause related health conditions. The contributing problem is women's failure to act as autonomous agents because they either choose not to take an active part in their own therapy or because they fear to question physicians' medical authority. To insure that patients' autonomy and free choice are a part of every physician-patient interaction, physicians and patients need actively to promote them as values that are absolutely indispensable in physicians' offices, clinics, and hospitals.

Introduction: Palliative sedation is the use of sedatives to lower the alertness for symptomcontrol, when suffering is otherwise uncontrollable. Its role in palliative care is frequentlyargued, with both proponents and opponents. End-of-life decisions raise many concerns,including ethical ones, regarding which ethical principle should be valued the most. Someopponents argue that palliative sedation is ethically similar to euthanasia, but there alsoappears to be some confusion concerning concepts and definitions. Aim: To discuss ethical arguments for and against palliative sedation, and relevant ethicaldifferences between palliative sedation and euthanasia. Furthermore, to try to clarify differentconcepts and definitions used in the discussion of the matter. Materials and methods: This work is based on a qualitative literature study, and anargumentative- and concept analysis on hermeneutic ground. Material was gathered through aliterature search, and contains official material, debate articles and scientific articles. Results: Palliative sedation can be argued to protect the ethical values of autonomy,beneficence, dignity and integrity, but simultaneously it is argued to violate those ethicalconcepts. There seems to be disagreements regarding which principle should be highestvalued. Conclusion: The matter of palliative sedation is delicate, and engages a lot of people. Pro- andcontra-arguments vary in strength, partly because of an inconsistency in the use of differentconcepts and definitions. In most of the material studied, it is argued that palliative sedation isethically acceptable, whereas euthanasia is not.

Introduction: Physician assisted suicide (PAS) is the process where the patient terminateshis/her life with the aid of a physician who provides a prescription for lethal medication thatthe patient self-administers in order to commit suicide. PAS is practiced in several countriesand is now gaining support in Sweden. The debate shows some confusion regarding thedefinition of concepts and raises several ethical concerns. Aim: To provide an empirical background and clarify concepts. To analyze the ethical arguments for and against PAS. To investigate relevant ethical differences between PAS, euthanasia and withdrawal oflife-sustaining treatment. Materials and methods: Qualitative literature study based on argumentative- and conceptualanalysis on hermeneutic ground. Materials were gathered through a literature search andconsist of scientific articles, debate articles and official materials. Results: The main ethical arguments supporting PAS are autonomy, beneficence and dignity.PAS is by supporters seen as an act of compassion, which fulfills the physician’s obligation ofnon-abandonment. Opponents emphasize that PAS goes against the duty of beneficence andnonmaleficence and fear that there may be a slippery slope where more and more people willdemand PAS. Conclusion: There is no consensus on whether PAS is considered ethically defendable or not.PAS appears to involve a conflict of interest between the principles of beneficence andautonomy. There seems to be some factual disagreements as well as different positions as tohow the ethical principles should be interpreted, and which ethical principle should be valuedthe highest.

<p>There is no stronger or more enduring prohibition in medicine than the rule against the killing of patients by doctors. This prohibition is rooted in some medical codes and principles. Out standing among the principles surrounding these prohibitions are the principles of beneficence and non-maleficience. The contents of these principles in a way mark the professional integrity of the physician. But the modern approach to health care services pulls a demand for the respect of the individual right of self-determination. This demand is now glaring in almost all the practices pertaining to health care services. In end of life decisions, this modern demand is found much in practices like physician- assisted suicide and euthanasia. It demands that the physician ought to respect the wish and choice of the patient, and so, must assist the patient in bringing about his or her death when requested. In such manner, this views the principle of autonomy as absolute and should not be overridden in any circumstance.</p><p>However, the physician on his part is part of the medical profession that has integrity to protect. This integrity in medical profession which demands that the physician works only towards the health care of the patient and to what reduces diseases and deaths often go contrary to this respect for individual autonomy. Thus faced with such requests by patients, the physician always sees his integrity in conflict with his demand to respect the autonomous choice of the patient and so has a dilemma in responding to such requests. This is the focus of this work,"Professional Integrity and the Dilemma in Physician- Assisted Suicide"</p><p>However, the centre of my argument in this work is not merely though necessary to develop general arguments for or against the general justification of PAS, but to critically view the role played by the physicians in assisting the death of their patients as it comes in conflict with the medical obligation and integrity. Is it morally right, out rightly wrong or in certain situation permissible that physicians respond positively to the request of the patients for PAS? This is the overarching moral problem in the morality of physician- assisted suicide, and this work will consider this in line with the main problem in the work “the dilemma of professional physicians in the assistance of suicide.</p>