Search

In this paper, I argue that there are a number of ethical issues facing college and professional athletes that admit of a unified treatment: viewing athletes as workers. By worker, I mean an agent who sells their labor for compensation. With this notion of worker in place, I present and discuss arguments for four claims: not paying college athletes is morally wrong; that the N.C.A.A. infringes on the right of college athletes to collectively bargain; that it is prima facie wrong to draft and trade professional athletes; and that fans fail to respect athletes' right to strike when they complain about labor stoppages in professional leagues. I argue that sports fans and members of sports media should explicitly conceive of athletes as workers to recognize and prevent these wrongs. I conclude by suggesting that all with an interest in the welfare of labor have an interest in conceiving of athletes as workers, as it puts what is owed to all workers into stark relief. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 vaccine has been a miraculous, life-saving advance, offering staggering efficacy in adults, and was developed with astonishing speed. The time from sequencing the virus to authorizing the first COVID-19 vaccine was so brisk even the optimists appear close-minded. Yet, simultaneously, United States' COVID-19 vaccination roll-out and related policies have contained missed opportunities, errors, run counter to evidence-based medicine, and revealed limitations in the judgment of public policymakers. Misplaced utilization, contradictory messaging, and poor deployment in those who would benefit most-the elderly and high-risk-alongside unrealistic messaging, exaggeration, and coercion in those who benefit least-young, healthy Americans-is at the heart. It is important to consider the history of COVID-19 vaccines to identify where we succeeded and where we failed, and the effects that these errors may have more broadly on vaccination hesitancy and routine childhood immunization programs in the decades to come.

Journal editors have a large amount of power to advance open science in their respective fields by incentivising and mandating open policies and practices at their journals. The Data PASS Journal Editors Discussion Interface (JEDI, an online community for social science journal editors: www.dpjedi.org ) has collated several resources on embedding open science in journal editing ( www.dpjedi.org/resources ). However, it can be overwhelming as an editor new to open science practices to know where to start. For this reason, we created a guide for journal editors on how to get started with open science. The guide outlines steps that editors can take to implement open policies and practices within their journal, and goes through the what, why, how, and worries of each policy and practice. This manuscript introduces and summarizes the guide (full guide: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/hstcx ).

BackgroundRadiotherapy is an essential component of cancer treatment, yet many countries do not have adequate capacity to serve all patients who would benefit from it. Allocation systems are needed to guide patient prioritization for radiotherapy in resource-limited contexts. These systems should be informed by allocation principles deemed relevant to stakeholders. This study explores the ethical dilemmas and views of decision-makers engaged in real-world prioritization of scarce radiotherapy resources at a cancer center in Rwanda in order to identify relevant principles.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 22 oncology clinicians, program leaders, and clinical advisors. Interviews explored the factors considered by decision-makers when prioritizing patients for radiotherapy. The framework method of thematic analysis was used to characterize these factors. Bioethical analysis was then applied to determine their underlying normative principles.ResultsParticipants considered both clinical and non-clinical factors relevant to patient prioritization for radiotherapy. They widely agreed that disease curability should be the primary overarching driver of prioritization, with the goal of saving the most lives. However, they described tension between curability and competing factors including age, palliative benefit, and waiting time. They were divided about the role that non-clinical factors such as social value should play, and agreed that poverty should not be a barrier.ConclusionsMultiple competing principles create tension with the agreed upon overarching goal of maximizing lives saved, including another utilitarian approach of maximizing life-years saved as well as non-utilitarian principles, such as egalitarianism, prioritarianism, and deontology. Clinical guidelines for patient prioritization for radiotherapy can combine multiple principles into a single allocation system to a significant extent. However, conflicting views about the role that social factors should play, and the dynamic nature of resource availability, highlight the need for ongoing work to evaluate and refine priority setting systems based on stakeholder views.

Background: The philosophy of the discipline of physical education among school, further and higher education curriculums remains misunderstood, understudied and underdeveloped. With growing levels of uncertainty concerning its philosophical nature, general future (e.g. eradication, more of the same, radical change), and the role the profession plays within modern educational institutions, there is an urgent need to acknowledge, problematize, interpret and to study the unavoidably philosophical nature of the subject. Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to strengthen the justification for movement-oriented character education in schools by articulating a neo-Aristotelian interpretation of physical education. Key Concepts: Aligned with this goal, I begin by clarifying my guiding philosophical framework of neo-Aristotelian virtue ethics by synthesizing the concepts of virtue, character, phronesis and eudaemonia. Subsequently, I deconstruct contemporary practices associating character education to physical education circles with the goal of illuminating the potential of a philosophically informed approach compared to the dominant practice-driven and anecdotal view of character. In summary, I address the field's; overreliance on caught character; overemphasis on performance virtue; disproportionate focus on résumé virtues over eulogy virtues; the use of character as a peripheral curriculum activity; and lack of emphasis on wisdom and eudaemonia. Thereafter, I articulate one Aristotelian interpretation of physical education as if (neo) Aristotle was the teacher himself. From this position, I describe an education fixated on the affective domain, primarily concerned with helping youth to comprehend their moral potential in life through movement and inspired by the view that the cultivation of virtuous skills, agency, and reasoning are foundational to a flourishing society. Conclusion: By taking this approach, I philosophize the concept of the 'Virtuous Mover' and the potential ways in which school-based physical educators might begin to help future generations of youth to flourish. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Related Articles The number of monetary redress programs for survivors of nonrecent abuse in out‐of‐home care is growing. These programs help make monetary remedies more accessible to survivors. However, the reasons that justify these programs also encourage policy makers to adopt paternalistic measures. This article argues that most paternalistic restrictions are unjustified because they infringe on survivors' autonomy without clearly benefiting them.Kahn‐Nisser, Sara. 2018. “Constructive Criticism: Shaming, Incentives, and Human Rights Reforms.” Politics & Policy 46(1): 58–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12240.Winter, Stephen. 2020. “Tools for Tragedy: Procedures for Assessing Historic Redress Claims.” Politics & Policy 49(1): 162–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12385.Woessner, Matthew, and April Kelly‐Woessner. 2006. “Slavery Reparations and Race Relations in America: Assessing How the Restitutions Debate Influences Public Support for Blacks, Civil Rights, and Affirmative Action.” Politics & Policy 34(1): 134–54. 10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2006.00007.x. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the concept of individuality and its significance in society. It argues that being different from others is inherently valuable and goes beyond autonomy and authenticity. The author uses the example of identical clones to illustrate the importance of individuality. The article also discusses the relationship between individuality and moral status, as well as the value of rarity and diversity. Overall, it emphasizes the need to recognize and appreciate individuality in order to maintain a diverse and meaningful society. [Extracted from the article]

This article introduces seven ethical issues raised by the introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) at work. Each ethical issue is presented in connection to broader and older philosophical topics as well as topics in the more specialised literature on applied ethics of technology. The seven issues are: (1) How to govern the impact of AI on job losses and other social issues raised by the reshaping of the job market? (2) AI may contribute to create new forms of oppression and violation of rights of the workforce; (3) AI may negatively affect workers' (moral) agency, autonomy or responsibility; (4) AI may create hidden labour, that is, economically valuable tasks are performed by human agents without their work being sufficiently recognised, rewarded or protected, with (technological) companies acquiring an unfair gain and an increasing socio-economic power over people; (5) To what extent can AI affect the opportunity for people to perform good or meaningful work, and how should meaningful work be defined in a pluralistic society? (6) The introduction of AI at work may have a broader impact on social values and norms; (7) Who is responsible for making AI have a positive rather than a negative impact on ethical and societal values? In addition to providing a critical introduction to the ethical debate on AI and the future of work, the article also positions on this broader ethical and philosophical map the five articles of The Journal of Ethics special issue 'Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Work'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, Rawls asserted that his conception of justice should provide guidance for a non-ideal theory of real-world injustices. Nonetheless, he established at the same time an enigmatic limit to his framing in which neither political philosophy nor justice as fairness should be understood as applied approaches. It is unclear how guidance against real-world injustices is possible, since it would presumably require insights into applied ethics. This paper focuses on drafting a possible alternative by offering a partially comprehensive reconstruction of the reasonable as a virtue. The hope is to use the virtue of reasonable citizens to transfer Rawlsian ponderations into a special kind of applied ethics controversies concerned with urgent public debates and resistance politics. The idea of this construction is to allow the virtue of the reasonable to establish a standard for citizen conduct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article theorizes how femme sociality and world-making provide a counterpoint to a politics that aims for neutrality or innocence, arguing that neutrality or innocence are hallmarks of different forms of patriarchy. Instead, the authors offer embracing complicity as a concept that structures practical ethics centered in abolitionism and nondisposability. Complicity is formulated as a mode of self-understanding that guides action, evading the social hierarchies demanded by a claim to innocence, uprooting (neo)liberal attitudes that look to evade friction by doling out punishment and exclusion. The proposal to embrace complicity is followed by a proposal for solidarity based on openness. Rather than being "right" or "solving problems," a turn to the sensuous provides a form of world-making that can hold difference—without reducing life to the single organizational forms characteristic of liberalism. As a key part of this form of solidarity, the authors show how trans femmeness emphasizes possibilities for social and sensorial transformation. Practices of care and solidarity allow one to entangle with different forms of life. Instead of reforming the structures of oppression, femme practices encourage us to unlearn and uproot institutional forms that reproduce social and material oppressions, and to take agency in (re)constructing and nourishing one's own worlds—to collectively plant the rose garden of struggle for liberation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contemporary ethics is currently ramifying into different sub-ethics specific to each type of technology. Although this trend has been very timely and rightly called into question by Sætra and Danaher, both these authors and their critics Llorca Albareda and Rueda leave the matter unsolved from a discipline point of view. In this commentary, we clarify the statute of the ethics of technology, which corresponds to that of a subsidiary applied ethics, and show how it is precisely that, what renders the creation of an ethics for each technology inappropriate. We thus provide a disciplinary reason to support Sætra and Danaher’s concern on tech ethics proliferation and to refute Llorca Albareda and Rueda’s relativization of it. In turn, we conclude by drawing some guidelines for tech ethics in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundFamilies whose child has unexplained intellectual or developmental differences often hope that a genetic diagnosis will lower barriers to community-based therapeutic and support services. However, there is little known about efforts to mobilize genetic information outside the clinic or how socioeconomic disadvantage shapes and constrains outcomes.MethodsWe conducted an ethnographic study with predominantly socioeconomically disadvantaged families enrolled in a multi-year genomics research study, including clinic observations and in-depth interviews in English and Spanish at multiple time points. Coding and thematic development were used to collaboratively interpret fieldnotes and transcripts.ResultsThirty-two families participated. Themes included familial expectations that a genetic diagnosis could be translated into information, understanding, and assistance to improve the quality of a child's day-to-day life. After sequencing, however, genetic information was not readily converted into improved access to services beyond the clinic, with families often struggling to use a genetic diagnosis to advocate for their child.ConclusionFamilies' ability to use a genetic diagnosis as an effective advocacy tool beyond the clinic was limited by the knowledge and resources available to them, and by the eligibility criteria used by therapeutic service providers' - which focused on clinical diagnosis and functional criteria more than etiologic information. All families undertaking genomic testing, particularly those who are disadvantaged, need additional support to understand the limits and potential benefits of genetic information beyond the clinic.

Coghlan and Cox (Between death and suffering: Resolving the gamer’s dilemma. Ethics and Information Technology) offer a new resolution to the Gamer’s Dilemma (Luck, The Gamer’s Dilemma. Ethics and Information Technology). They argue that, while it is fitting for a person committing virtual child molestation to feel self-repugnance, it is not fitting for a person committing virtual murder to feel the same, and the fittingness of this feeling indicates each act’s moral permissibility. The aim of this paper is to determine whether this resolution – the repugnant resolution – successfully resolves the Gamer’s Dilemma. We argue that it does not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I argued, in the article “Is prostitution harmful?”, that if one holds that casual sex is not per se harmful, one should hold that neither is prostitution. Bjørn Hofmann and Morten Magelssen make the case that my article is methodologically flawed – so flawed, in fact, that it can serve as a cautionary tale about how this type of ethical work should not be done. Are they right?

Background: Research cites shortcomings and challenges facing research ethics committees in many regions across the world including Arab countries. This paper presents findings from qualitative in-depth interviews with research ethics committee (REC) chairs to explore their views on the challenges they face in their work with the oversight of research involving human populations. Methods: Virtual in-depth interviews were conducted with chairs (n = 11) from both biomedical and/or social-behavioral research ethics committees in six countries, transcribed, coded and subject to thematic analysis for recurring themes. Results: Two sets of recurring themes impede the work of the committees and pose concerns for the quality of the research applications: (1) procedures and committee level challenges such as heavy workload, variations in member qualification, impeding bureaucratic procedures, member overwork, and intersecting socio-cultural values in the review process; (2) inconsistencies in the researchers' competence in both applied research ethics and research methodology as revealed by their applications. Conclusions: Narratives of REC chairs are important to shed light on experiences and issues that are not captured in surveys, adding to the body of knowledge with implications for the region, and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in other parts of the world. International research collaborations could benefit from the findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is predicted to have a deep impact on the future of work and employment. The paper outlines a normative framework to understand and protect human freedom and justice in this transition. The proposed framework is based on four main ideas: going beyond the idea of a Basic Income to compensate the losers in the transition towards AI-driven work, towards a Responsible Innovation approach, in which the development of AI technologies is governed by an inclusive and deliberate societal judgment; going beyond a philosophical conceptualisation of social justice only focused on the distribution of 'primary goods', towards one focused on the different goals, values, and virtues of various social practices (Walzer's 'spheres of justice') and the different individual capabilities of persons (Sen's 'capabilities'); going beyond a classical understanding of capital, towards one explicitly including mental capacities as a source of value for AI-driven activities. In an effort to promote an interdisciplinary approach, the paper combines political and economic theories of freedom, justice and capital with recent approaches in applied ethics of technology, and starts applying its normative framework to some concrete example of AI-based systems: healthcare robotics, 'citizen science', social media and platform economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Virtue ethical inspired approaches to practical and professional ethics have long been endorsed across various disciplines. Journalistic ethics is no exception. Call such approaches Virtue Ethical Journalism (VEJ). Virtue ethics has also drawn considerable attention from the field of moral psychology, though not all of it is supportive. Among the critics, some take the view that character traits and virtues are not effective enough in guiding people's behavior. As a result, they conclude that traits should be minimized in ethical thought. Call this stronger view character skepticism. VEJ has taken character skepticism seriously. Many responses to character skepticism defending VEJ, however, raise similar points as those that defend a more general theory of virtue ethics from such skepticism. I argue, however, that such responses to character skepticism are not up to the task of defending VEJ. Accordingly, VEJ would benefit from novel responses to character skepticism or significant revision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much neuroethics literature concludes with a set of normative recommendations. While these recommendations can be a helpful way of summarizing a proposal for a future direction, some have recently argued that ethics scholarship has devoted insufficient attention to considerations of audience and real-world applications. To date, however, while scholars have conducted topic analyses of neuroethics literature, to our knowledge no study has evaluated who neuroethics scholarship addresses and what it recommends. The objective of the present study therefore was to provide a preliminary characterization of recommendations offered in neuroethics scholarship and an assessment of their target audiences. Rather than attempting to demarcate what constitutes “neuroethics scholarship,” we analyzed text that authors’ had self-identified as being neuroethics-related: abstracts presented at the International Neuroethics Society (INS) annual meetings and published as top abstracts in AJOB Neuroscience in the last decade (2011–2020). We found that a majority of abstracts utilized conceptual methods (62.2%) and provided conceptual recommendations (68%). Roughly 77% of all abstracts did not explicitly address a target audience, yet nearly all of these were implicitly directed at other scholars. The remainder specified a target audience of scholars (12.2%), regulators (6.7%), healthcare providers (6.7%) and industry (2.6%). Only a subset of abstracts provided practical or policy recommendations (19.7%). Of those, the majority (61.5%) did not specify a target audience. Among the subset with actionable recommendations, a clarification of target audience may help increase the impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Identifying peacekeeping as practical ethics helps analyze how the problems of existing approaches to military ethical training led to practical problems of standard setting. This article illustrates the value of understanding ethics as a theoretical framework to confront and prepare for moral practice. Pointing out the problems in terms of how military ethics ascertain the nature of ethics, the field of military ethics frames problems in ways that undermine standard settings for moral practice. Specifying these problems complements established theoretical inputs and helps peacekeepers better adjust to the moral choices and dilemmas ahead. This is particularly because military ethical training is also about coming to terms with society's moral standards and demands that led to peacekeeping and peacebuilding missions in the first place. The article illustrates the advantages and disadvantages of this approach to military ethical training with the example of Austrian peacekeeper ethical training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research delves into applied ethics, an ever-evolving discipline that grapples with ethical challenges across diverse human spheres. To gain insights and track emerging patterns, this study employs bibliometric analysis on scholarly applied ethics publications. The analysis uncovers 7207 documents authored by 18461 individuals, amassing 76597 citations. Notably, 234 collaborative works between the United States and Australia underscore global knowledge exchange. English dominates, yielding 7015 publications and 76349 citations. Noteworthy journals include the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics with 499 publications and a Journal Impact Factor (JIF) of 2.37, while the Marine Ecology Progress series attains a peak JIF of 12.59. Articles lead in publication type (6253 instances, 69133 citations), with Hagendorff's "The Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines" emerging as a frontrunner with 310 citations from the journal Minds and Machines (2020). "Ethics" emerges as a primary keyword, accompanied by a growing mention of "artificial intelligence," signaling the prominence of environmental ethics and the budding field of AI ethics. Recurring terms like conservation, behavior, climate change, ethics, and management underscore their significance. Collaborative endeavors between Australia and the USA yield 234 publications, demonstrating cross-continental scholarly synergy. These findings guide researchers, policymakers, and practitioners in recognizing crucial domains, fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, and addressing pressing ethical concerns across diverse realms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on the ethics of AI and the principles behind it. Prior to the rules governing AI, it is necessary to understand the ethical issues related to the development, implementation and responsible use of AI systems. These ethical foundations are necessary to protect the rights and dignity of individuals, ensure fairness in data access and processing, minimise biases and risks associated with algorithms, promote transferability in automated decisions, and promote trustworthiness in technology, human benefit and social welfare. It is also proposed to study the ethics of AI from an all-encompassing point of view that integrates both applied ethics and metaethics of AI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contemporary accounts of the concept of exploitation can be grouped into camps that tie the wrongness of taking advantage of another person to: (1) the unfair division of benefits resulting from an interaction; (2) excessive benefits resulting from structural injustice; and (3) a failure of respect for others' humanity. In practice, accounts of exploitation that focus on the fairness of benefits resulting from individual transactions and, to a lesser degree, unjust social and economic institutions have dominated the applied ethics literature using the concept of exploitation. However, fairness-based accounts of exploitation have a difficult time explaining a common dimension of purportedly exploitative cases in the press and academic literature—namely the absolute deprivation of and/or experience of injustice by victims of exploitation. In this paper, I argue that a respect-based account can explain how exploitation arises both from individual interactions and against a backdrop of injustice. Specifically, our connections with one another and social and economic institutions specify the duty of beneficence and political responsibility to promote just institutions. Exploitation takes place when people fail to act on these specified obligations in favor of their own benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Turkish Studies - Language & Literature is the property of Electronic Turkish Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The present study used quantitative and qualitative measures to examine Iranian applied linguists' (mis-) conceptions of ethical issues in research. For this purpose, one hundred and twelve applied linguists completed a research ethics questionnaire constructed and validated by the researchers. In the follow-up qualitative phase, 15 applied linguists who were faculty members participated in semi-instructed interviews. Data were analyzed using exploratory factors analyses for the first phase and theme analyses for the second phase. Quantitative results showed that the most important misconceptions among Iranian applied linguists lingered on working with data (data collection and data analyses). For example, removing an outlier was a prevalent act conducted by applied linguists in the present study. Teachers using their students as participants of their own research as well as how they treated those students after a study were other controversial issues. The qualitative results revealed several themes including lack of knowledge, conflict with real-world practices, a product-oriented approach to education and a publish or perish mentality as the reasons for misconceptions of ethics in applied linguistics among Iranian researchers. On general terms, there was an implicit agreement regarding the lack of training on research ethics among Iranian applied linguists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study attempted to answer the question of how to share the values and ethics of youth work among practitioners and with policymakers, funders, and society. Although social interest in youth support in Japan has been on rise recently due to the increase number of difficulties surrounding young people, the 'ethics and values' in practice and in the field can be driven by the neoliberal social and political trends present in our society. This study presents a way to resist and counter the penetration of neoliberal practical ethics and organisational management through the process of visualising, sharing and legitimising the 'practical ethics and values' embedded in the fields where youth work has been developed with young people. This is the research-based practice of 'practitioners collectively telling, writing, sharing, and communicating the stories of practice'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For the first comparison, we weighed predicted hospitalisations prevented by one booster dose of BNT162b2 with vaccine-associated SAEs from the manufacturer's randomised trial (3/5055).3 We found that the rate of expected SAEs would outweigh the benefits of the booster against hospitalisation by at least 18-fold. Lam and Nichols suggest that this was an inappropriate comparison, as not all SAEs result in hospitalisation. However, the definition of SAE as used in the trial included death, hospitalisation, disability, permanent damage, life-threatening event or condition, which required medical or surgical intervention to prevent a serious outcome.4 While all comparisons include some degree of incommensurability, comparing these SAEs with hospitalisations prevented by the booster is more reasonable than Lam and Nichols' suggestion of comparing SAEs to infections prevented. The COVID-19 infection hospitalisation risk in this age group was

The Last Gift is an observational HIV cure-related research study conducted with people with HIV at the end of life (EOL) at the University of California San Diego. Participants agree to voluntarily donate blood and other biospecimens while living and their bodies for a rapid research autopsy postmortem to better understand HIV reservoir dynamics throughout the entire body. The Last Gift study was initiated in 2017. Since then, 30 volunteers were enrolled who are either (1) terminally ill with a concomitant condition and have a prognosis of 6 months or less or (2) chronically ill with multiple comorbidities and nearing the EOL.Multiple ethical and logistical challenges have been revealed during this time; here, we share our lessons learnt and ethical analysis. Issues relevant to healthcare research include surrogate informed consent, personal and professional boundaries, challenges posed conducting research in a pandemic, and clinician burnout and emotional support. Issues more specific to EOL and postmortem research include dual roles of clinical care and research teams, communication between research personnel and clinical teams, legally required versus rapid research autopsy, identification of next of kin/loved ones and issues of inclusion. Issues specific to the Last Gift include logistics of body donation and rapid research autopsy, and disposition of the body as a study benefit.We recommend EOL research teams to have clear provisions around surrogate informed consent, rotate personnel to maintain boundaries, limit direct contact with staff associated with clinical care and have a clear plan for legally required versus research autopsies, among other recommendations.

Sociological research on social movements and politics holds that advocacy organizations are typically trusted to be authentic agents of their constituents. At the same time, however, businesses and other outside interests often engage in covert “astroturfing” strategies in which they ventriloquize claims through apparently independent grassroots associations (but which are entirely funded and staffed to benefit the sponsor). These widespread and deceptive strategies may harm trust in advocacy groups overall, extending beyond those revealed to be involved, through a mechanism of categorical stigmatization. This study is the first to test how revealed covert patronage may “poison the well” for all advocacy groups, with implications for how social movements and other advocacy causes suffer harm from illegitimate political practices by other organizations. The authors carried out two survey-experiments in which a local advocacy organization was revealed to be operating, respectively, as a “front” for either a corporation or think tank; in each experiment, conditions varied depending upon whether the sponsor was presented as highly reputable, low reputation, or with no specified reputation. In both experiments, astroturfing led to significant declines in trust in advocacy groups overall. We highlight implications for theory and research on social movements, organizational theory, and political processes.

Abstract: Rawls famously argued against meritocratic conceptions of distributive justice on the grounds that the accumulation of merit is an unavoidably lucky process, both because of differences in early environment, and innate talents. Thomas Mulligan (2018a) has recently provided a novel defense of meritocracy against the “luck objection”, arguing that both sources of luck would be mostly eliminated in a meritocracy. While a system of fair equality of opportunity ensures that differences in social class or early environment do not lead to differences in the accumulation of merit, Kripke’s essentiality of origin thesis means that our genetic endowments, and thus our innate talents, could not have been any other way. But if we could not fail to have our innate talents, Mulligan argues, then it is not a matter of luck that we have them, and so the merits we accumulate on their basis are not so luck-dependent. This paper argues that Mulligan’s appeal to the essentiality of origin thesis fails to rescue meritocratic conceptions of distributive justice from the luck objection for two reasons. First, even granting essentiality of origin and fair equality of opportunity, the contingencies of the market and the social environment mean that having some innate talents is far luckier than having others. And second, the appeal to essentiality of origin misses the underlying motivation for the luck objection, and ignores the intimate connection between desert and responsibility.

Abstract: Growing evidence suggests the presence of a female leadership advantage (FLA), such that women leaders tend to be associated with more effective outcomes in uncertain conditions. However, mechanisms linking women's leadership to effective outcomes are less well understood. We integrate FLA insights with ethics of care philosophical framework to conceptualize how women leaders achieve effective outcomes in the context of the urban revitalization crisis in the United States. We propose and empirically test the mediating role of ethics of care leadership in the relationship between women mayors and economic health of their cities. We used data from the Urban Institute that includes 272 United States cities and measures of variables in our conceptual model at five points in time spanning 36 years (n = 1185 city-year observations). We capture ethics of care leadership focused on racial inclusion with an index measure of a city’s racial spatial segregation, homeownership gap, poverty gap, and education gap, and we capture economic health with an index measure of a city’s employment growth, unemployment rate, housing vacancy rate, and median family income. We found that female-led cities were associated with better economic health, and this association was mediated by female-led cities’ association with greater racial inclusion. Ethics of care leadership appears to be one pathway through which a FLA manifests itself in the context of the urban revitalization crisis. This underscores the importance of city leadership that balances social and economic prerogatives. Implications are discussed.

In 2022, students at North American universities with third-dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates risk disenrolment if unvaccinated. To assess the appropriateness of booster mandates in this age group, we combine empirical risk-benefit assessment and ethical analysis. To prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation over a 6-month period, we estimate that 31 207-42 836 young adults aged 18-29 years must receive a third mRNA vaccine. Booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented, we anticipate at least 18.5 serious adverse events from mRNA vaccines, including 1.5-4.6 booster-associated myopericarditis cases in males (typically requiring hospitalisation). We also anticipate 1430-4626 cases of grade ≥3 reactogenicity interfering with daily activities (although typically not requiring hospitalisation). University booster mandates are unethical because they: (1) are not based on an updated (Omicron era) stratified risk-benefit assessment for this age group; (2) may result in a net harm to healthy young adults; (3) are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; (4) violate the reciprocity principle because serious vaccine-related harms are not reliably compensated due to gaps in vaccine injury schemes; and (5) may result in wider social harms. We consider counterarguments including efforts to increase safety on campus but find these are fraught with limitations and little scientific support. Finally, we discuss the policy relevance of our analysis for primary series COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

Despite the potential value of graduate-level research ethics training, most Middle East countries, including Jordan, do not routinely offer formal research ethics training. In students enrolled in Jordanian master's level graduate program in pharmacy, the current study assessed: 1- differences in pre- and post-enrollment exposure to research ethics core themes, 2- whether this exposure was through a formal course or in an informal setting, and 3- student attitudes towards research ethics education and the need for integrating a dedicated research ethics course into pharmacy graduate programs. A 12-item on-line survey was developed by the authors and disseminated to a convenience sample of current and former master-level pharmacy students in Jordan. A total of 61 eligible respondents completed the survey. A minority of respondents (38%) acknowledged receiving research ethics training prior to enrollment into a postgraduate pharmacy program with nearly half (16%) describing this training as informal. In comparison, a larger percentage of the total respondents (56%) had received research ethics training during their postgraduate program enrollment, with nearly half of those (25%) indicating that this training was informal. A majority of respondents reported a strong need for integrating a formal research ethics course into postgraduate pharmacy curriculum (90%) to support their research training and thesis writing (89%). Overall, the study revealed a notable lack of research ethics education for graduate-level pharmacy students in Jordan.

The Public Health Service Increased Risk designation identified organ donors at increased risk of transmitting hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and human immunodeficiency virus. Despite clear data demonstrating a low absolute risk of disease transmission from these donors, patients are hesitant to consent to receiving organs from these donors. We hypothesize that patients who consent to receiving offers from these donors have decreased time to transplant and decreased waitlist mortality. We performed a single-center retrospective review of all-comers waitlisted for liver transplant from 2013 to 2019. The three competing risk events (transplant, death, and removal from transplant list) were analyzed. 1603 patients were included, of which 1244 (77.6%) consented to offers from increased risk donors. Compared to those who did not consent, those who did had 2.3 times the rate of transplant (SHR 2.29, 95% CI 1.88-2.79, p

BackgroundOne of the next frontiers in HIV research is focused on finding a cure. A new priority includes people with HIV (PWH) with non-AIDS terminal illnesses who are willing to donate their bodies at the end-of-life (EOL) to advance the search towards an HIV cure. We endeavored to understand perceptions of this research and to identify ethical and practical considerations relevant to implementing it.MethodsWe conducted 20 in-depth interviews and 3 virtual focus groups among four types of key stakeholders in the United States (PWH, biomedical HIV cure researchers, HIV clinicians, and bioethicists) to obtain triangulated viewpoints because little was known about the ethics of this topic. Each group was queried as to ethical considerations, safeguards, and protections for conducting HIV cure-related research at the EOL to ensure this research remains acceptable.ResultsAll four key stakeholder groups generally supported HIV cure-related research conducted at the EOL because of the history of altruism within the PWH community and the potential for substantial scientific knowledge to be gained. Our informants expressed that: (1) Strong stakeholder and community involvement are integral to the ethical and effective implementation, as well as the social acceptability of this research; (2) PWH approaching the EOL should not inherently be considered a vulnerable class and their autonomy must be respected when choosing to participate in HIV cure-related research at the EOL; (3) Greater diversity among study participants, as well as multi-disciplinary research teams, is necessitated by HIV cure-related research at the EOL; (4) The sensitive nature of this research warrants robust oversight to ensure a favorable risk/benefit balance and to minimize the possibility of therapeutic misconception or undue influence; and (5) Research protocols should remain flexible to accommodate participants' comfort and needs at the EOL.ConclusionBecause of the ethical issues presented by HIV cure-related research at the EOL, robust ethical safeguards are of utmost importance. The proposed ethical and practical considerations presented herein is a first step in determining the best way to maximize this research's impact and social value. More much inquiry will need to be directed towards understanding context-specific and cultural considerations for implementing EOL HIV cure research in diverse settings.

Currently, there are no adequate methods for dealing with changes in the healthcare system brought about by electronic health applications (eHealth) or the associated ethical implications in practice. This can be attributed to the lack of comprehensive interdisciplinary approaches that could support teams in integrating ethical considerations into the agile software development process. To close this gap, the DARE approach has been developed and tested in interdisciplinary collaborative research. The DARE method is a modular system designed to improve the development of ethically sound software in a deliberative, agile, and responsive manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides an overview of Janne Mattila's book "The Eudaimonist Ethics of al-Fārābī and Avicenna," which delves into the ethical theories of these two Islamic philosophers. The book primarily focuses on the concepts of happiness and virtue and compares the perspectives of al-Fārābī and Avicenna. However, the article highlights some limitations of the book, such as the absence of a thorough comparison between the two philosophers and the exclusion of important sources. Despite these shortcomings, the book is considered a valuable contribution to the field of Islamic moral philosophy. The text also explores the role of prophecy in achieving happiness according to al-Fārābī and Avicenna, as well as the connection between theoretical perfection and the afterlife. Additionally, it examines the relationship between virtue, happiness, and rationality in their philosophies. However, the author's evaluation of Avicenna's philosophy is incomplete and influenced by al-Fārābī's perspective. The book's conclusion lacks a comprehensive summary of the questions explored and the overall theory of virtue and happiness. [Extracted from the article]