Search

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, shortages of scarce healthcare resources consistently presented significant moral and practical challenges. While the importance of vaccines as a key pharmaceutical intervention to stem pandemic scarcity was widely publicized, a sizable proportion of the population chose not to vaccinate. In response, some have defended the use of vaccination status as a criterion for the allocation of scarce medical resources. In this paper, we critically interpret this burgeoning literature, and describe a framework for thinking about vaccine-sensitive resource allocation using the values of responsibility, reciprocity, and justice. Although our aim here is not to defend a single view of vaccine-sensitive resource allocation, we believe that attending critically with the diversity of arguments in favor (and against) vaccine-sensitivity reveals a number of questions that a vaccine-sensitive approach to allocation should answer in future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A commentary on the 2024 article "Affect, Values and Problems Assessing Decision-Making Capacity," by J. Hawkins is presented. Topics covered include how models, including Hawkins,' tend to fall short, a proposed model of capacity assessment and the possible scenarios following a patient decision. It also discusses the issue of testing bias in capacity assessment.

The article focuses on the ethical implications of luck egalitarianism in the context of allocating scarce healthcare resources during a pandemic, particularly debating whether vaccination status should influence access. Topics include the distinction between "brute luck" and "option luck" in distributive justice, the role of randomization as a method of allocation, and the challenges luck egalitarians face in reconciling principles of justice with practical resource constraints.

The article focuses on ethical considerations surrounding individual responsibility for vaccination during pandemics, exploring how public health systems might allocate resources based on these decisions. Topics include moral accountability for vaccine refusal, the impact of societal inequalities on decision-making, and the concept of a "knowledge commons" in managing public health as a shared resource.

The article focuses on vaccination-sensitive healthcare rationing, exploring theoretical frameworks and practical implications. Topics include identifying overlooked medical conditions in rationing decisions, assessing the ethical and political legitimacy of such policies in real-world settings, and considering the intersection of healthcare rationing with climate-related challenges.

The article focuses on justice pluralism during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly examining the integration of vaccination status into resource allocation policies. Topics include the complexities of vaccine-sensitive resource allocation, the multifaceted nature of justice principles in medical ethics, and the ethical considerations in prioritizing medical resources based on urgency and need.

The article focuses on the debate surrounding vaccine-sensitive allocation in intensive care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Topics include ethical considerations regarding responsibility for health outcomes due to lifestyle choices, the implications of collective health decisions on individual care access, and the ethical challenges of viewing healthcare as a resource subject to punishment based on personal choices rather than medical need.

The article focuses on the ethical considerations of resource allocation during a pandemic, specifically ventilators and healthcare staff, examining the use of vaccination status as a criterion. Topics include ethical concepts such as responsibility, reciprocity, and justice, notably omitting a discussion on whether such allocation could coerce individuals into vaccination.

The article focuses on the ethical considerations of denying Intensive Care Unit (ICU) care to vaccine refusers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Topics include the ethical implications of using vaccine status as a criterion for scarce medical resource allocation, exploring values of responsibility, and justice within medical decision-making.

The article focuses on the Ethical Data Practices framework (EDP), which outlines principles for the ethical collection and use of personal data by companies. It mentions the commentaries on the article fall into three groups: recommendations for applying or strengthening the framework, questions about its foundational principles, and discussions on the limitations of industry self-regulation and the need for comprehensive privacy legislation and government oversight.

An editorial is presented the potential impact of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, particularly large language models like ChatGPT, on scholarly publishing, examining how authors, peer reviewers, and editors might utilize AI in various stages of the publication process. It authors, editors of bioethics and humanities journals, discuss the implications of generative AI in scholarly publishing.

The article focuses on Minkoff, Vullikanti, and Marshall's concern that the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling threatens not only the right to abortion but also the ability of pregnant individuals to refuse unwanted obstetric interventions. It argue that while Dobbs might not directly undermine the rights of pregnant people, it sets a precedent for measures based on fetal personhood that could broaden incursions against those rights.

The article presents the discussion on surgeons feel the moral pressure at the sharp end of the decision process leading to surgical innovation. Topics include sharing responsibility with these fellow decision-makers, surgeons are uniquely required to enact, and then to live with the consequences of their actions; and immediacy and intimacy of the surgical operation focuses accountability on the surgical team.

The author comments on the Ethical Data Practices Framework advanced in the target article by M. S. McCoy and colleagues. Topics include the pragmatic approach taken by McCoy and colleagues to helping companies respect substantive ethical principles in routine company operations that involve processing and sharing personal data, brief historical accounting of the past 20 years of data privacy negotiations between the U.S. and European Union (EU), and the EU-U.S. data privacy framework.

The article describes the development of de-bi technology and a proof-of-concept pilot study with a large breast cancer biobank. Topics discussed include feasibility and relevance of technical solutions for effective advancement of EDP, challenges for decentralized biobanking, and required investment in new technology in new approaches to data sharing and disclosure.

The authors comment on an article by M. S. McCoy and colleagues which proposed an ethical framework that combines substantive and procedural principles as well as factors for successful implementation. Topics discussed include purpose of Ethical Data Practices Framework (EDP), multiple points where McCoy and colleagues' approach aligns with data solidarity, and pillars of solidarity-based data governance.

It has become increasingly difficult for individuals to exercise meaningful control over the personal data they disclose to companies or to understand and track the ways in which that data is exchanged and used. These developments have led to an emerging consensus that existing privacy and data protection laws offer individuals insufficient protections against harms stemming from current data practices. However, an effective and ethically justified way forward remains elusive. To inform policy in this area, we propose the Ethical Data Practices framework. The framework outlines six principles relevant to the collection and use of personal data—minimizing harm, fairly distributing benefits and burdens, respecting autonomy, transparency, accountability, and inclusion—and translates these principles into action-guiding practical imperatives for companies that process personal data. In addition to informing policy, the practical imperatives can be voluntarily adopted by companies to promote ethical data practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses three key target articles about the impact of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) on bioethics moving forward. Topics include challenges that GenAI poses for bioethics from the perspective of integration to clinical medicine, impact of large language models (LLMs) on clinical ethics pedagogy, and advantages and challenges of training an LLM.

The article focuses on Ray and Cooper's call to integrate environmental justice into bioethics, critiquing their emphasis on national disparities and arguing for the crucial role of international institutional factors in perpetuating global environmental injustice, framing it as a violation of a duty not to harm the global poor. Climate change, discussed as a pressing global health challenge.

The article focuses on the essentialist perspective of personhood, influencing abortion laws, particularly in the U.S., where fetuses are considered akin to healthy adult human beings with inherent dignity and a fundamental right to life. It discusses the impact of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Dobbs et al. v Jackson Women's Health Organization et al., which established that fetuses are entitled to the same rights as already born persons.

The article presents the discussion on Blumenthal-Barby (2024) presents strong arguments that bioethicists should stop using the concept "personhood." Topics include definitions have counterintuitive and at times offensive implications and sound unacceptable to non-philosophers; and attitudes about desirability and acceptability infect judgments about which conditions are diseases.

The article focuses on evaluating arguments regarding whether vaccination status should influence healthcare rationing, organizing discussions around responsibility, reciprocity, and justice. Topics include ethical considerations in healthcare allocation during scarcity, the role of personal responsibility in public health policy, and contrasting perspectives on harm prevention versus punitive measures in healthcare decision-making.

The article focuses on the "spheres of morality framework," highlighting the varied roles physicians undertake, each guided by unique moral norms. Topics discussed include the proposed moral spheres, the incorporation of medical education and public accountability, and identified limitations such as the oversight of power dynamics and a singular focus on physicians without considering perspectives of other healthcare professionals.

The article examines computational ethics tools used to audit corporate self-governance in data processing. Topics discussed include an example which shows how corporate self-reporting is not guaranteed to be an accurate or comprehensive representation of company practices, computational approaches to improving visibility and transparency, and challenges for implementing computational ethics measures.

The authors propose four general guidelines for using artificial intelligence (AI) in the bioethics classroom such as transparency, antidiscrimination, privacy, and accountability. They stress the need of professors and instructors to accept responsibility and outcomes for AI generated products. They also offer a suggestion to prepare the next generation of bioethicists.

The authors comment on the article "Epistemic rights and responsibilities of digital simulacra for biomedicine" by M. Cho and N. Martinez-Martin which discusses the ethical challenges associated with the use of digital simulacra in biomedicine. Topics discussed include Ubuntu in the context of digital simulacra, how developers could mitigate ethical challenges according to Cho and Martinez-Martin, and reason that humility can help developers resist moral detachment.

The article focuses on moral and ethical aspects related to elective ectogestation (EE) on the basis of the pregnant woman's autonomous choice without any medical justification. Topics discussed include cesarean section for partial gestation using artificial womb technology (AWT), the permissibility of relinquishing responsibility for prenatal harm and agent-centered and patient-centered explanations of parental responsibility.

The author discusses consideration of value of lived experiences pertaining to debates in bioethics, and mentions liabilities and assets of experience of families and patients. Topics discussed include discussion on social epistemology to promote biological debate, responsibility of bioethicists on considering biases, and challenges of representation of stakeholder communities.

The article focuses on ethical concerns for consideration of behavioral contracts to challenging interaction with families and patients. Topics discussed include responsibilities of the patient established by relative distribution of inequalities, role of patients in ensuring authenticity of medicine realized by active engagement in the patient-physician relationship, and need of patients to represent one's condition and needs.

The article presents the discussion on e-cigarettes not reducing the harms associated with tobacco consumption. Topics include public health ethics and population-level bioethics specifically focusing on the enormous burdens of noncommunicable disease; and field of public health law being the law in major social determinant of health.

The authors comment on the article "Vexing, Veiled, and Inequitable" by Amy Fairchild and colleagues, which analyzed social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic through a rights framework. Topics discussed include argument that the ethical reasoning is consistent with the long-recognized harm principle, proposed re-interpretation of the harm principle, and way individuals and households assume responsibilities and risk contributing to harms.

The article offers innovation from Ethical Integration. Topic include describe how elements from the Responsible Innovation (RI) framework (Stilgoe et al. 2013) can supplement the five domains of the implementation science framework by Sisk et al. (2020); and presenting Responsible Innovation (RI) framework involves four actions for the innovation process—anticipation, reflexivity, inclusion, and responsiveness.

The article focuses on the Gift, Reciprocity and Learning Health Systems. Topics discussed include Lee (2021) suggests a conceptualization of health data sharing not merely as an act of altruism, but as a gift; and the difference is important, as the inscription of the latter in a social context involves a network of mutual obligations.

The article offers information on the significant contributions of intersectionality in clinical medicine. It mentions intersectionality requires broader commitment to institutional change, which can be difficult to bring about, given the intransigence of institutional policies and practices; and also mentions intersectionality is concerned with macro-, meso-, and micro-level interactions.

Early intervention (EI) aims to identify children or families at risk of poor health, and take preventative measures at an early stage, when intervention is more likely to succeed. EI is concerned with the just distribution of "life chances," so that all children are given fair opportunity to realize their potential and lead a good life; EI policy design, therefore, invokes ethical questions about the balance of responsibilities between the state, society, and individuals in addressing inequalities. We analyze a corpus of EI policy guidance to investigate explicit and implicit ethical arguments about who should be held morally responsible for safeguarding child health and well-being. We examine the implications of these claims and explore what it would mean to put the proposed policies into practice. We conclude with some remarks about the useful role that philosophical analysis can play in EI policy development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses failures in COVID-19 Response and Beyond", Alex London soundly argues statements of the core ethical and professional responsibilities of clinicians have flawed in ways that threaten the fundamental goals of medicine. Topics include the primary locus of medical ethics has the clinician patient interaction; and a clinician has not at fault for failing to take into account the impact of actions.

The article offers information on Accountability in the Machine Learning Pipeline: The Critical Role of Research Ethics Oversight. It mentions authors frequently imply that the development of healthcare Machine Learning involves research, but avoid explicitly naming ethics review boards as overseers of the Evaluation and Oversight pipeline.

The article highlights a study aimed to highlights ethical considerations in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of genome editing technologies. Topics discussed include role of genome editing technologies advanced research and development efforts in the life sciences; products involving gene editing; and experience of Merck KGaA, a multinational corporation actively involved in discovering, developing, producing, selling, and using genome editing tools.

Various U.S. laws, such as the Clean Air Act and the Food Quality Protection Act, require additional protections for susceptible subpopulations who face greater environmental health risks. The main ethical rationale for providing these protections is to ensure that environmental health risks are distributed fairly. In this article, we (1) consider how several influential theories of justice deal with issues related to the distribution of environmental health risks; (2) show that these theories often fail to provide specific guidance concerning policy choices; and (3) argue that an approach to public decision making known as accountability for reasonableness can complement theories of justice in establishing acceptable environmental health risks for the general population and susceptible subpopulations. Since accountability for reasonableness focuses on the fairness of the decisionmaking process, not the outcome, it does not guarantee that susceptible subpopulations will receive a maximum level of protection, regardless of costs or other morally relevant considerations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Physician Payments Sunshine Act (PPSA) requires health care product manufacturers to report to the federal government payments more than $10 to physicians. Bringing unprecedented transparency to medicine, PPSA holds great potential for enabling medical stakeholders to manage conflicts of interest (COI) and build patient trust—crucial responsibilities of medical professionalism. The authors conducted six focus groups with 42 physicians in Chicago, IL, San Francisco, CA, and Washington, DC, to explore attitudes and experiences around PPSA. Participants valued the concept of transparency but were wary of the law's design and consequences. They downplayed PPSA's potential and felt it undermined public trust. Showing broad unawareness of COI, they dismissed the notion of industry influence and welcomed company “perks.” Misapprehensions may leave physicians unprepared to advance the opportunities PPSA holds for professionalism. The authors offer recommendations for government and medicine to improve physicians' and other stakeholders' understandings and use of the data. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article presents the a case study of a 3-year-old patient who had biliary atresia, which caused irreparable damage and eventually liver failure. Topics discussed the experience and risk towards liver transplantation; mentions the failure of liver transplantation that cause the death of patient; and highlights to improve the process of clinical and moral decision making.

The article offers information on the responsibility and duties of the surgeon-in-chief to ensure that surgical resources, from operating room time to surgical and intensive care unit (ICU) beds. It discussed appointment of the board of directors of a hospital as a form of public oversight of a community resource, and mentions the minor extension to consider surgeons-in-chief and their innovation to provide innovative practice.

The article offers information on an advise against physician-investigators obtaining research consent from their own patients. It mentions that informed consent should be both informed and voluntary, involving at least disclosure of relevant and understandable information to the participant to facilitate informed choice and the participant's voluntary decision; and also mentions the role of the physician-investigator would be to explain to the potential participant.

The article offers information on the necessity of absolute separation of consent from clinical practice. It mentions the clinical care ecosystem is evolving toward team-based care embedded in a structure capable of leveraging ubiquitous information; and also mentions successful integration of research and clinical care is critical to improving the health of individuals and populations.

The article offers information on the role physician investigators may play in obtaining informed consent. It mentions the ethical proscription against dual-role consent needs rethinking; and also mentions guidance or institutional policy interpreting state law to mandate that physician investigators obtain informed consent to research.

The article offers information on social justice within clinical ethics training. Topics discussed include with a more deliberative effort toward a deeper understanding of justice as it relates to care, efficiency, and public health; mentions no theoretical approach or framework may resolve ethical dilemmas affecting undocumented patients; and also mentions medical education has emphasized the importance of justice and the fair treatment of patients.

The article offers information on the specific approach to dual-role consent in clinical research. It mentions virtue ethics place-focused framework recognizes the distinct ethical aspects of different physician-investigator relationships and the diverse nature of clinical research; and also mentions the responsibilities of professionals in dual or multiple relationship situations have always raised matters of ethics.

The article examines on the impact of patents over foundational technologies to aggravate and lock inequalities. It highlights the encouragement of higher prices, broaden of research agenda and inhibition of alternatives when producing access to intellectual property. An overview on the research in science and technology studies (STS) for the outcome of negotiations, is also mentioned.

The authors discuss a study about early intervention policies raising difficult ethical issues on the proper allocation of responsibility for children's well-being. The study authors say that the documents they studied regard bad parenting as the main causes of bad outcomes. It is noted that the rights that parents have over their children are grounded entirely in children's interests. The concept of familial relationship goods is mentioned.