The Importance Of Bioethics

As the Macquarie dictionary defines, ethics are “the justification for and formal reasoning behind human moral behaviour.” Therefore bioethics are ethics which deal with issues to do with life, medicine, science, law and religion, this vast mix of subjects often making it difficult to have clear bioethical answers. Jewish people have their own set of bioethics derived from their covenant with God. Thus Jews follow “ethical monotheism” the belief in one God who reveals the law and in return protects them. Looking at the topics of euthanasia, abortion and human cloning, one can see the bioethical teachings of the Jewish people and where they come from.

When it comes to the medical field I knew that primary care providers and others in the medical field must always choose positive care for their patients, but I never thought of other consequences that may arise from these actions. The principle of utility states, "we should produce the most favorable balance of good over bad (or benefit over harm) for all concerned. The example of immunization of all children on page 11 in Bioethics: Principles, Issues and Cases is an example that with the good will come back. People in the medical field must make these decisions that in the end could harm a few but save more people.

Bioethics is a very diverse and subjective issue in Buddhism that bases its self around fundamental Buddhist laws such as the five precepts, the four Noble Truths and The Noble Eightfold path. Each Buddhist variant approaches bioethics differently based on the variants primary goal, ideals or practices. However all Buddhists views of bioethics are somewhat influenced by the universal goal of Buddhism to become liberated from the constant cycle of reincarnation or samsara. In conjecture with Buddhism, the occurrence of samsara allows for one to attain a new view on everything including bioethics allowing for the chance to discover or come to an ultimate realisation which in turn allows for the ultimate realisation of issues relating to

Humans are on a constant quest in the search for perfection and advancement in all areas of life through progressive scientific knowledge. From such a stance, the future of humans appears boundless with all the potential possibilities biotechnology provides, but such developments will cause ethical, social and biological implications.

How far would you go to save human lives and to progress society for those in need? The benefits of genetic engineering have shown to outweigh the ethical and environmental consequences associated within the field. Genetic Engineering has shown to provide major benefits in the field of medicine and agriculture but is faced with extreme criticism and backlash, specifically on the basis of ethics.

In the patient confidentiality case of Carlos, a 21 year old Hispanic male is being discharged from his hospital stay for a gunshot wound. Carlos is intended to receive nursing care at home from his sister, Consuela. Carlos is secretly a homosexual and is concerned that his secret will be revealed and be disgraced by his family. Carlos pleaded with his physician not to inform his sister that he is HIV-positive. Not informing Consuela would seem to increase her risk of contracting HIV while attending to Carlos’ wounds. The ethical issue is whether Carlos’ physician is justified in breaching confidentiality on the grounds that he has the “duty to warn”

In Life, Liberty and the Defense of Dignity, author Leon Kass argues that technology, although marvelous for what it permits us to achieve, has and may continue to threaten human flourishing. He argues that, many of our technological advancements have become a substitution for the development of our human capabilities (para. 22). Kass bolsters his argument by engaging readers with a comprehensive dialogue about the issues of technology. Though Kass does cover a number of issues in this book, they all specifically focus on the issues concerning biotechnology. Kass dedicates chapter 4 of Life, Liberty and the Defense of Dignity to inquire about the “moral meaning of the entire enterprise of genetic technology” (Leon Kass, 121).

Genetic engineering has been the subject of controversy since it first started. There is a lot of fear and concern surrounding the possibilities it presents. It is difficult to make ethical decisions about genetic engineering because if offers opportunities to solve many genetic problems such as hereditary diseases. The consequences are positive and negative, but there is no way to determine which will have a greater impact. Genetic engineering could lead to new treatments for hereditary diseases, but it could also have long-term adverse effects. Although there are benefits to genetic engineering, the negative side cannot be overlooked.

The idea that people of different cultures, socioeconomic statuses, and races would have different beliefs on what should and should not be deemed ethical is not something that is difficult to believe. Cultural bioethics, is the “effort systematically to relate bioethics to the historical, ideological, cultural, and social context in which it is expressed” (Callahan 2004, 281). The Lacks family’s cultural beliefs led them to believe that the work done for black people at Johns Hopkins and many other hospitals at the time was not ethical, although many doctors would disagree with this statement. As a result of their beliefs, the family decided that they would only go to Johns Hopkins Medical Center, “when [they] thought [they] had no choice”

The debate on whether human genetic engineering should be researched and used as the main alternative solution to disease have been going on since the creation of the "human genetic engineering" phenomenon. The ethical question is clear: should money be invested in human genetic engineering and should we research it at all, even if it is formally criticized by all monotheistic religions? The ethical principles in conflict are beneficence (people with fatal diseases could be cured) and non-maleficence (undermines the will of God, according to religious groups and in addition, there is no guarantee of successful results). My stance on this debated topic is that human genetic engineering should not be funded or researched, as there is no 100% guarantee that it will be successful, and in addition, I am a very religious person, and in my opinion, the body that a person has is a gift of God, and it should not be changed in any ways. However, there are still thousands of people with fatal diseases who have no hope for surviving, and human genetic engineering could serve as the only hope for them. There are many sides that can be affected either positively or negatively if human genetic engineering is funded and researched, however, the major stakeholders are primarily the government of US and private companies who fund all the experiments, people with fatal diseases who hope for any type of cure., and the science in general, because if

Advancements of research and innovation in Techno Sciences have always been controversial with first controversy being risk- focused and the second one being ethical framed. When science and technology intersect with society it not only promotes common good to the society but also exposes us to serious ethical and social issues that we humans would be facing in the coming years. This paper outlines one such emerging technology in the field of Medicine- Biotech Medicine and association of ethical dilemma, threats and other serious social concerns it would raise when deployed into everyday

fields like cloning, stem cell research, and gene manipulation. Cloning is able to help those

+ According to traditional bioethics, some ethical ways of allocating resources are those dependent on equal health care needs, healthy workforce, and QALYs. Equal healthcare means that resources that are allocated in ways that are equally distributed among all those patients that have the same health care needs. This view in traditional bioethics treats all subjects the same regardless of the circumstances. Therefore, certain patients might not be prioritized because all patients would be given the same treatment. A healthy workforce is also a way of allocating resources according to traditional bioethics because those that are involved might look at the need to have a healthy workers. This would allow those that are patients to be cured because

Before going in depth with the viewpoints and opinions involved in the topic of bioethics, we must first ask, what is bioethics? Well, bioethics is the studying of a topic that has aspects that are controversial both legally, and morally. There is a line between what experiments or studies are legal, and what is morally proper and ethical. Scientists take on a role and are responsible for the proper use of their power and ability to manipulate parts of the human body. We have these ethical standards to ensure that the things being carried out in the lab is both humane and helpful. Before any science experiments can really be held, the scientists ask themselves if they CAN, the law asks if they MAY, and morality asks if they SHOULD conduct such experiments. Bioethics is the theory surrounding these 3 questions, and whether the answer to any of the 3 be a yes or no, it’s hard to find any one experiment that does not have its controversial debates pertaining either the legality, or morality in nature. Scientists who have focused on stem cell research have had an ongoing ethical battle. For example, in the article “Saving Superman: Ethics and Stem Cell Research,” an article focused on Christopher Reeve’s accident leaving him paralyzed due to a separation in his spine, he himself was an advocate for stem cell research. Though he knew that it could possibly help is condition and

Witcombe, J., & Sanchez, J. (2004). Food systems and security helping the poor cope. Retrieved from http://www.id21.org/health/InsightsHealth5art3.html