Search

This paper opens a critical conversation about the ethics of international bioethics conferencing and proposes principles that commit to being anti-discriminatory, global, and inclusive. We launch this conversation in the Section, Case Study, with a case example involving the International Association of Bioethics' (IAB's) selection of Qatar to host the 2024 World Congress of Bioethics. IAB's choice of Qatar sparked controversy. We believe it also may reveal deeper issues of Islamophobia in bioethics. The Section, Principles for International Bioethics Conferencing, sets forth and defends proposed principles for international bioethics conferencing. The Section, Applying Principles to Site Selection applies the proposed principles to the case example. The Section, Applying Principles Beyond Site Selection addresses other applications of the proposed principles. The Section, Objections responds to objections. We close (in the Section, Conclusion) by calling for a wider discussion of our proposed principles. One-Sentence Capsule Summary: How should bioethicists navigate the ethics of global bioethics conferencing? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors comment on the article "Epistemic rights and responsibilities of digital simulacra for biomedicine" by M. Cho and N. Martinez-Martin which criticizes the influence that data sourcing for artificial intelligence (AI) has on the healthcare sector. Topics discussed include possible concerns on the shift of focus from real to simualted patients, the need for effective risk mitigation strategies in the generation and utilization of synthetic data, and responsible synthetic voice data.

The article presents the discussion on establishing three categories of genetic conditions and approaching differently in the clinical encounter. Topics include recommending screening for rare conditions in populations with a low risk a priori significantly increasing the likelihood of false positives; and recommending screening means potentially encouraging or pushing more women in a path leading to invasive diagnostic testing.

The authors comment on the article "Positive Public Health Ethics" by Jennifer Prah Rugers which argues that the COVID-19 pandemic is a global health injustice because of the moral failures of national governments and international organizations to prepare for and prevent it. Topics include the social inequities revealed in the pandemic, immunity licenses as one policy instrument that is being tested, and the bioethics debate surrounding the justice implications of such licenses.

The authors comments on an article by I. G. Cohen on ChatGPT's ethical implications for medical artificial intelligence (AI). Topics discussed include ChatGPT's general design as raising unique issues, key values and constant ethical concerns, and some of the least discussed but crucial values identified in the article.

The article comments on the article "The Harm Principle Cannot Replace the Best Interest Standard: Problems With Using the Harm Principle for Medical Decision Making for Children," by J.C. Bester. It discusses the implications of both the harm principle and the BIS for a certain category of cases. It illustrate BIS appropriateness by applying it to the case of fertility preservation for young girls through ovarian tissue cryopreservation.

The article addresses the issue of the impact of language in the case of gene editing and emerging CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat) technologies in relation to the emerging technology mitochondrial/nuclear transfer (M/NT). Topics discussed include what mitochondrial transfer is, how terminology frames the ethical debate on M/NT, and the challenges the choice of terminology poses in cases of emerging new technologies.

In Western countries today, a growing number of women delay motherhood until their late 30s and even 40s, as they invest time in pursuing education and career goals before starting a family. This social trend results from greater gender equality and expanded opportunities for women and is influenced by the availability of contraception and assisted reproductive technologies (ART). However, advanced maternal age is associated with increased health risks, including infertility. While individual medical solutions such as ART and elective egg freezing can promote reproductive autonomy, they entail significant risks and limitations. We thus argue that women should be better informed regarding the risks of advanced maternal age and ART, and that these individual solutions need to be supplemented by a public health approach, including policy measures that provide women with the opportunity to start a family earlier in life without sacrificing personal career goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses ethical issues associated with fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) in context of cultural, religious and ideological food restrictions. Topics include rejection of donation from donor who does not adhere to the dietary requirements same as that of the recipient; no association between FTM and food consumption as per biological and a clinical perspective; and preference given to the stranger-donors when compared to the relatives because they have different microbiome.

The author offers insights on the framework for unrestricted prenatal whole-genome sequencing. Topics covered include the need for prenatal genetic testing to focus on promoting reproductive autonomy, the measurement of the effectiveness of prenatal testing and the justification of public funding of noninvasive prenatal whole-genome sequencing (NIPW). Also mentioned is the reliance of the framework on a process requiring prospective parents' extended engagement.

The author comments on the article "The Curious Case of the De-ICD: Negotiating the dynamics of autonomy and paternalism in complex clinical relationships" by Daryl Pullman and Kathleen Hodgkinson which appeared in the August 2016 issue. The article provides the response of an ethics consultation service to a request for the removal of an implantable device. The commentator explains that more nuanced accounts of autonomy have emerged in the bioethics discourse and in clinical practice.

Investigators and institutional review boards should integrate plans about the appropriate disclosure of individual genetic results when designing research studies. The ethical principles of beneficence, respect, reciprocity, and justice provide justification for routinely offering certain results to research participants. We propose a result-evaluation approach that assesses the expected information and the context of the study in order to decide whether results should be offered. According to this approach, the analytic validity and the clinical utility of a specific result determine whether it should be offered routinely. Different results may therefore require different decisions even within the same study. We argue that the threshold of clinical utility for disclosing a result in a research study should be lower than the threshold used for clinical use of the same result. The personal meaning of a result provides additional criteria for evaluation. Finally, the context of the study allows for a more nuanced analysis by addressing the investigators' capabilities for appropriate disclosure, participants' alternative access to the result, and their relationship with the investigators. This analysis shows that the same result may require different decisions in different contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors discuss the article "Gender eugenics? The ethics of PGD for intersex conditions," by Robert Sparrow which is published in the same issue. They suggest that preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) may become an integral part of in vitro fertilization to improve success rates for pregnancy which could increase parental control over the genetics of future children. They state a collective intersex movement is underway and mention social forces shape parental attitudes and perceptions.

The article highlights Withholding and Withdrawing of medical practice as a religious cultural path towards a practical resolution. Topics discussed include emotional and moral tension created by withdrawing that is often not addressed by efforts to educate providers; Dying Patient Law made by Israeli government in 2000 to address that patients at the end of life had no legal right to withdraw life-sustaining treatment.

In this article the author presents his views on an article which discussed few ethical and legal assumptions that are currently accepted as basic principles in Western medicine and bioethics, particularly on patient autonomy and the right to refuse medical interventions. This commentary will highlight the significant cultural gap between the point of departure for expanding the scope of patients' rights and the end of life, and the recent Israeli experience in the same field.

The article is a correspondence in response to open peer commentaries on "Disclosing Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants."

The author reflects how the argument of the article "Does Lack of 'Genetic-Relative Family Health History' Represent a Potentially Avoidable Health Disparity for Adoptees" by Thomas May and colleagues in the same issue applies to individuals conceived using donor gametes. Topics covered include how anonymously donated gametes is considered as a source of health disparity, the difference between donor conception and adoption, and the essential elements characterizing health disparities.

In this article the authors discuss the article "Toward a More Stable Blood Supply: Charitable Incentives, Donation Rates, and the Experience of September 11" by Reuben G. Sass. They are supportive of several points about cash incentives in blood donation which are raised in Sass' article and are critical of a ban in the U.S. and Canada which prohibits men who have sex with men from becoming blood donors.

A letter from the authors of the article "Sleepwalking Into Infertility: The Need for a Public Health Approach Toward Advanced Maternal Age" which appeared within the issue is presented.

Argues against the claims of Judy Illes and Eric Racine that traditional bioethical analysis is not enough for the analysis of neuroethics. Similarity between the ethical issues related to clinical applications of brain research and genetic research; Arguments raised by Illes and Racine in favor of neuroethics exceptionalism.

The article offers information on molecular epigenetics provides information to expand the scope of bioethics along with environmental and public health ethics. Topics discussed include epigenetics could not be explained by the changes in the DNA sequence; molecular bridge between physicochemical and psychosocial environments; and need to promote social justice and environmental protections.

The article offers information on the Genetic Exceptionalism. Topics discussed include Genetic testing was traditionally limited to targeted testing for rare monogenic conditions, in high-risk or symptomatic individuals; mentions Genetic technology advances more rapidly than updates in health professionals training about genetic testing; and also mentions most health professionals have not had adequate training to interpret genetic test results and genetic information.

The article presents the arguments both for and against the potential use of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for "non-medical" traits. It mentions that ethical decision-making regarding prenatal screening should not be solely based on biomedical criteria. It highlights the need for more careful consideration of the use of NIPT for non-medical traits and suggests that decision-making should not solely focus on what is medically possible or on the criterion of pathology.

The article presents the discussion on favor of evidence-based policy development for expanding prenatal genetic testing. Topics include "severe" medical conditions categorized as such according to "actual patient goals and desires;" and beliefs regarding family planning laying the foundation for shared decision-making before, during, and after pregnancy.