The Ethics of Population Policy for the Two Worlds of Population Conditions

Population policy has taken two divergent trajectories. In the developing part of the world, controlling population growth has been a major tune of the debate more than a half-century ago. In the more developed part of the world, an inverse pattern results in the discussion over the facilitation of population growth. The ethical debates on population policy have primarily focused on the former and ignored the latter. This paper proposes a more comprehensive account that justifies states' population policy interventions. We first consider the reasons that support pro-natalist policies to enhance fertility rates and argue that these policies are ethically problematic. We then establish an ethics of population policy grounded on account of self-sustaining the body politic, which consists of four criteria: survival, replacement, accountability, and solidarity. We discuss the implications of this account regarding birth-control and pro-natalist policies, as well as non-procreative policies such as immigration, adoption, and unintended baby-saving strategies.

Join the discussion on animal welfare, ethics and rights

A panel of experts will lead a conversation on the concepts of animal welfare, ethics and rights at this year's Animal Welfare Foundation Discussion Forum.

Providing ethics advice in a pandemic, in theory and in practice: A taxonomy of ethics advice

The pandemic significantly raised the stakes for the translation of bioethics insights into policy. The novelty, range and sheer quantity of the ethical problems that needed to be addressed urgently within public policy were unprecedented and required high-bandwidth two-way transfer of insights between academic bioethics and policy. Countries such as the United Kingdom, which do not have a National Ethics Committee, faced particular challenges in how to facilitate this. This paper takes as a case study the brief career of the Ethics Advisory Board (EAB) for the NHS Covid-19 App, which shows both the difficulty and the political complexity of policy-relevant bioethics in a pandemic and how this was exacerbated by the transience and informality of the structures through which ethics advice was delivered. It analyses how and why, after EAB's demise, the Westminster government increasingly sought to either take its ethics advice in private or to evade ethical scrutiny of its policies altogether. In reflecting on EAB, and these later ethics advice contexts, the article provides a novel framework for analysing ethics advice within democracies, defining four idealised stances: the pure ethicist, the advocate, the ethics arbiter and the critical friend.

Lessons for Ethics From the Kingdom of Fungi

This article considers lessons about American (individual-centered) anthropocentric (human-centered) thinking that can be applied to how we confer dignity and moral status to beings other than humans. Interestingly, global bioethics might glean such lessons from fungi.

Permanent Contraception: Ethical Issues and Considerations: ACOG Committee Statement No. 8

Permanent contraception is the most used method of contraception among women aged 15-49 years and is one of the most straightforward surgical procedures an obstetrician-gynecologist can perform. At the same time, this therapeutic option is enormously complex when considered from a historical, sociological, or ethical perspective. This Committee Statement reviews ethical issues related to permanent contraception using a reproductive justice framework. Ethical counseling and shared decision making for permanent contraception should adopt a nonjudgmental, patient-centered approach, using up-to-date information about permanent contraception procedures and alternatives. Obstetrician-gynecologists should strive to avoid bringing into the clinical encounter biases around gender, race, age, and class that affect thoughts on who should or should not become a parent. Obstetrician-gynecologists should also ensure that permanent contraception requests reflect each patient's wishes, come from a desire to permanently end childbearing, and come from a preference for permanent contraception over all reversible methods as well as permanent contraception for the male partner. When difficulties in meeting a postpartum permanent contraception request are anticipated and permanent contraception is desired by the patient, transfer of care for the remainder of pregnancy should be offered. ACOG recognizes the right of all patients to unimpeded access to permanent contraception as a way of ensuring health equity, but it is unclear how to craft policies that protect from coercion but also do not create barriers to autonomously desired care. Determining the ethical balance between access and safeguards will require a collaborative interdisciplinary approach that involves a variety of stakeholders with varying perspectives.

Can One Health Policy Help Us Expand an Ethics of Interconnection and Interdependence?

One Health-a holistic approach to health that brings the moral status of animals and environments into consideration-is understood as a "professional imperative," a value-laden obligation that flows from the scope and objectives of professional roles. In this article, antimicrobial resistance provides a case study to demonstrate the fruitfulness of public health and bioethics collaborations by applying One Health key concepts of interconnection and interdependence. Moving toward an ethics of One Health requires a more nuanced analysis of ecological relationships, including humans' connections to other species as hosts, vectors, domestic companions, meat-eaters' food, and farmers' livelihood.

Disaster solidarity and survivor ethics: a case study of Hurricane María in Puerto Rico

Liminal periods of disaster solidarity in the aftermath of disaster are a common experience of many survivors. These periods have a specifically ethical component in that people spontaneously engage in collective, altruistic action and magnanimously expand their ethical focus beyond normative social distinctions and hierarchies. Inevitably, however, such solidarity seems to wane, and people return to pre-disaster patterns of interaction. Nevertheless, some individuals move beyond opportune acts of assistance to more extensive reorganisations of their lives during the recovery period and reshape their ethical commitments in new and durable directions. These individuals help make visible marginalised 'others' and draw collaborators to share new ethical visions. Based on observational and interview data collected after Hurricane María (2017) in a mountainous Puerto Rican municipality and employing the framework of virtue ethics, this paper examines the differential effects of disaster solidarity on survivors' ethical responses and the different contributions these make to society.

Toward Planetary Health Ethics? Refiguring Bios in Bioethics

In responding to perceived crises-such as the COVID-19 pandemic-in routinized ways, contemporary bioethics can make us prisoners of the proximate. Rather, we need bioethics to recognize and engage with complex configurations of global ecosystem degradation and collapse, thereby showing us paths toward co-inhabiting the planet securely and sustainably. Such a planetary health ethics might draw rewardingly on Indigenous knowledge practices or Indigenous philosophical ecologies. It will require ethicists, with other health professionals, to step up and become public advocates for environmental sustainability. The COVID-19 pandemic should be seen as opening a portal to planetary health ethics or ecologized bioethics.

What can the citations of systematic reviews of ethical literature tell us about their use?-an explorative empirical analysis of 31 reviews

Background

Systematic reviews of ethical literature (SREL) aim at providing an overview of ethical issues, arguments, or concepts on a specific ethical topic. As SREL are becoming more common, their methodology and possible impact are increasingly subjected to critical considerations. Because they analyse and synthetise normative literature, SREL are likely to be used differently than typical systematic reviews. Still, the uses and the expected purposes of SREL were, to date, mainly theoretically discussed. Our explorative study aimed at gaining preliminary empirical insights into the actual uses of SREL.

Methods

Citations of SREL in publications, both scientific and non-scientific, were taken as proxy for SREL uses. The citations of 31 published SREL were systematically searched on Google Scholar. Each citation was qualitatively analysed to determine its function. The resulting categorisation of SREL citations was further quantitatively investigated to unveil possible trends.

Results

The analysis of the resulting sample of SREL citations (n=1812) showed that the selected SREL were mostly cited to support claims about ethical issues, arguments, or concepts, but also to merely mention the existence of literature on a given topic. In this sample, SREL were cited predominantly within empirical publications in journals from various academic fields, indicating a broad, field-independent use of such systematic reviews. The selected SREL were also used as methodological orientations either for the conduct of SREL or for the practical and ethically sensitive conduct of empirical studies.

Conclusions

In our sample, SREL were rarely used to develop guidelines or to derive ethical recommendations, as it is often postulated in the theoretical literature. The findings of this study constitute a valuable preliminary empirical input in the current methodological debate on SREL and could contribute to developing strategies to align expected purposes with actual uses of SREL.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-023-02341-y.

Nursing ethics as a distinct entity within bioethics: Implications for clinical ethics practice

The question of whether nursing ethics is a distinct entity within bioethics is an important and thought-provoking one. Though fundamental bioethical principles are appreciated and applied within the practice of nursing ethics, there exist distinct considerations which make nursing ethics a unique subfield of bioethics. In this article, we focus on the importance of relationships as a distinguishing feature of the foundation of nursing ethics, evidenced in its education, practice, and science. Next, we consider two objections to our claim of distinctiveness: first, that nursing ethics is merely an application of bioethical principles; second, that many bioethical subfields emphasize relationships. We respond by highlighting that throughout nursing education and generally in every career path that follows, the creation and nurturing of relationships is emphasized. Compassion and respect for the dignity of every patient is the framework upon which these therapeutic relationships are built. Much of the focus of nursing science rests on creating meaningful interpersonal experiences and human connection. After responding to each objection, we turn to the implications of this distinctiveness on clinical ethics practice, arguing that the strengths of our approach outweigh the limitations. The deep emphasis on creating meaningful interpersonal experiences and human connection supports a greater integration of relationships and social contexts into the evaluation of whether an action is ethically permissible, which is an important benefit in addressing the challenging human situations that patients face. Moreover, this perspective allows nurse ethicists to account for diverse and complex social structures and their influence in making ethical determinations. These strengths outweigh the limitations of potential inconsistencies between nurse and non-nurse clinical ethicists on the same service, a result we attribute to nursing ethics-and, in turn, the practice of the nurse ethicist-being framed by relationships to a larger extent than other bioethical subfields.

The ethics of bioethics conferencing in Qatar

In 2022, the International Association of Bioethics (IAB) announced that the 17th World Congress of Bioethics would be held in Doha, Qatar. In response to ethical concerns expressed about the Qatar selection, the IAB Board of Directors developed and posted to the IAB website a response using a Q&A format. In this Letter, we (the IAB President and Vice President) address concerns about the ethics of bioethics conferencing raised in a 2023 Letter to the Editor of Bioethics by Van der Graaf et al. We do not represent the Board of Directors, and this Letter expresses solely our own views.

The ethics of ethics conferences: Is Qatar a desirable location for a bioethics conference?

The next World Congress of Bioethics will be held in Doha, Qatar. Although this location provides opportunities to interact with a more culturally diverse audience, to advance dialogue between cultures and religions, offer opportunities for mutual learning, there are also huge moral concerns. Qatar is known for violations of human rights - including the treatment of migrant workers and the rights of women - corruption, criminalization of LGBTQI+ persons, and climate impact. Since these concerns are also key (bio)ethical concern we call for a broad debate within the bioethics community whether organizing and attending the World Congress in Qatar is ethically problematic and how ethical concerns should be dealt with.

Mass wolf cull in Sweden sparks debate

Georgina Mills reports on a controversial cull of wolves in Sweden, which has been criticised by environmental groups in the country.

The ethics of semantics in medicine

In this paper, we discuss the largely neglected topic of semantics in medicine and the associated ethical issues. We analyse several key medical terms from the informed perspective of the healthcare professional, the lay perspective of the patient and the patient's family, and the descriptive perspective of what the term actually signifies objectively. The choice of a particular medical term may deliver different meanings when viewed from these differing perspectives. Consequently, several ethical issues may arise. Technical terms that are not commonly understood by lay people may be used by physicians, consciously or not, and may obscure the understanding of the situation by lay people. The choice of particular medical terms may be accidental use of jargon, an attempt to ease the communication of psychologically difficult information, or an attempt to justify a preferred course of action and/or to manipulate the decision-making process.

Suicide and Homicide: Symmetries and Asymmetries in Kant's Ethics

Kant formulated a secular argument against suicide's permissibility based on what he regarded as the intrinsic value of humanity. In this paper, I first show that Kant's moral framework entails that some types of suicide are morally permissible. Just as some homicides are morally permissible, according to Kant, so are suicides that are performed according to equivalent maxims. Intention, foreseeability, voluntariness, diminished responsibility, and mental capacity determine the moral characterization of the killing. I argue that a suicide taxonomy that differentiates types of suicide according to morally relevant criteria is compatible with Kantian ethics; it establishes that even where we hold a robust deontological sanctity of life position, we are not obligated to preserve the lives of people whose future life only offers profound suffering, and helping them to die may be justifiable if doing so honors their dignity and autonomy. Nevertheless, homicide and suicide are only weakly morally symmetrical in that even if a given suicide is morally impermissible, we do not normally have the right to prevent it forcibly, though this may be altered by juridical laws under some circumstances.

Brain death as a moral definition and an act of love: the tale of Moon, Nehviel and Fate

The vital status of people with a destroyed brain is one of the most discussed topics in medical literature. According to the current legal narrative, people whose brain is destroyed are dead. Nevertheless, a clear biological rationale to support with certainty such a narrative is still lacking. The purported rationale of the "the brain as the central integrator of the body" has proven to be biologically untenable. Persons with a destroyed brain can be maintained viable for long periods of time, showing clear signs of good biological integration. This fact stirs up a continuous seething of heated discussions among scholars, and generates uncertainty among lay people, loss of trust towards the medical community, and highly controversial cases in the media. To try to settle this unresolved situation, we propose a moral narrative, according to which people whose brain is destroyed should be considered as dead. Defining those people as biologically dead is impossible. Their clinical condition is neither life nor death; it is something in between, an artifice created by modern medicine. Yet, we can well state that the irreversible loss of all brain functions is a clinically and scientifically useful point of no return in the process of dying which can guide sound decisions. Through a personal reinterpretation of the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice, we would like to show that the choice to consider people with a destroyed brain as dead is a sound moral decision and an act of love.

"An Ethics of Commitment for Engineers"

This paper follows a trend in engineering ethics away from universal moral theories towards more contingent/contextual approaches such as pragmatist and care ethics. These methodological considerations are treated in the context of the Volkswagen Diesel Emissions scandal as a case study in the "paradox of loyalty," (i.e. that company loyalty can be both virtuous and vicious). Building upon a combined pragmatist-care ethics approach, the article outlines an "ethics of commitment," inspired by the moral philosophy of Josiah Royce. The ethics of commitment locates the site of moral value in an individual's "commitment to a cause," where a "cause" refers to a purposive community of persons oriented by a shared end or ideal. The ethics of commitment improves upon a pragmatist-care ethics in two notable ways: first, addressing the problem of determining wrongdoing via pragmatist ethics, and second, by emphasizing the costly nature of moral action as a critical part of ethical deliberation, rather than appealing to empathy or moral sentiment. This process-described metaphorically as "centrifugal commitment"-remains contingent and fallible, but in a way that does justice to the broad scope of moral responsibility incumbent upon engineers.

Solidarity and the ethics of exposing others to risk in medical research

The ethical justifiability of the invitation of others to participate in research and their deliberate exposure to risks of harm is not a common topic in bioethics. If, however, some offers ought not to be made and the corresponding actions ought not to be facilitated, invitations to, and the conduct of, a medical study involving humans needs justification. This paper addresses this issue by linking the search for medical knowledge with solidarity. The argument begins with the observation that scientific research is aimed at general knowledge, which is a necessary condition of the social value of research. The applicability of this knowledge to many makes it potentially a public good; that is, a good that is available freely to all. For knowledge to be a public good, a social decision to make it freely available to all needs to be made. It is proposed that this decision be grounded in society's, and so in both researchers' and potential research participants', commitment to solidarity and its obligations of provision, sharing, support, and loyalty. These obligations imply, among other things, an imperfect obligation to participate in research and the corresponding entitlement of the investigators to invite others to participate in research, and so to expose them to its risks during implementation. This entitlement is exercised in an environment shaped by the standards and protections of research ethics and the relevant institutional arrangements.

The many metaphysical commitments of secular clinical ethics: Expanding the argument for a moral-metaphysical proceduralism

The rich moral diversity of academic bioethics poses a paradox for the practice of giving moral recommendations in secular clinical ethics: How are ethicists to provide moral guidance in a pluralistic society? The field has responded to this challenge with a "procedural approach," but defining this term stirs debate. Some have championed a contentless proceduralism, where ethicists work only to help negotiate resolutions among stakeholders without making any moral recommendations. Others have defended a moral proceduralism by claiming that ethicists should make moral recommendations that are grounded in bioethical consensus (e.g., relevant law, policy, professional consensus statements, and bioethics literature), which is secured using moral principles such as respect for persons or justice. In contrast, we develop a moral-metaphysical proceduralism by identifying many metaphysical commitments in points of secular bioethical consensus. The moral-metaphysical view of secular clinical ethics is important because it challenges the discipline to accept the substantive philosophical foundations required to support giving moral recommendations in a pluralistic context, which may lead to further insights about the nature of the field.

Costa, cancer and coronavirus: contractualism as a guide to the ethics of lockdown

Lockdown measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic involve placing huge burdens on some members of society for the sake of benefiting other members of society. How should we decide when these policies are permissible? Many writers propose we should address this question using cost-benefit analysis (CBA), a broadly consequentialist approach. We argue for an alternative non-consequentialist approach, grounded in contractualist moral theorising. The first section sets up key issues in the ethics of lockdown, and sketches the apparent appeal of addressing these problems in a CBA frame. The second section argues that CBA fundamentally distorts the normative landscape in two ways: first, in principle, it allows very many morally trivial preferences-say, for a coffee-might outweigh morally weighty life-and-death concerns; second, it is insensitive to the core moral distinction between victims and vectors of disease. The third section sketches our non-consequentialist alternative, grounded in Thomas Scanlon's contractualist moral theory. On this account, the ethics of self-defence implies a strong default presumption in favour of a highly restrictive, universal lockdown policy: we then ask whether there are alternatives to such a policy which are justifiable to all affected parties, paying particular attention to the complaints of those most burdened by policy. In the fourth section, we defend our contractualist approach against the charge that it is impractical or counterintuitive, noting that actual CBAs face similar, or worse, challenges.

The Ethics of Access: Reframing the Need for Abortion Care as a Health Disparity

The majority of U.S. abortion patients are poor women, and Black and Hispanic women. Therefore, this article encourages bioethicists and equity advocates to consider whether the need for abortion care should be considered a health disparity, and if yes, whether framing it this way would increase the ability of poor women and women of color to get the medical care they need. In order to engage with these critical questions, bioethicists must avoid abortion exceptionalism and respect patients as moral agents. Centering the conscience of pregnant people shifts our analysis away from the ethics of the act of abortion, and toward the ethics of access to abortion care. Because the Supreme Court is on the brink of shifting the question of abortion's legality to state legislatures, this is the moment for all bioethicists to clarify and strengthen their thinking, writing, and teaching in abortion ethics.

Womanist Ethics as a Contribution to Bioethics

This essay argues that womanism, a social theory focused on the embodied lives of Black women, can be useful to bioethicists as they consider health care ethics during a pandemic-and beyond. A general social justice-oriented ethical framework is helpful to begin a conversation on pandemic ethics, but it does not directly lead to the kind of on-the-margins-of-society framework that is necessary to increase health equity and justice. With particular concern for poor Black women, I discuss three main reasons that such an ethics framework needs to incorporate womanist ethics: the feminization of poverty, lack of access to high-quality health care, and rape and other historical violence against Black women. I conclude by proposing that an understanding of womanism as a correlative to the Black Lives Matter clarion call can create an ethical narrative in bioethics that can exist beyond times of pandemic.