THE MAIN PREOCCUPATION OF BIOETHICS

BY
IMOTER TUGHTUGH
Email: [email protected]
+2348065047535

Abstract

Bioethics is a sub-field of applied ethics. Ethics as a whole is a philosophical field of study that
grapples with questions of what is right and what is wrong, and applied ethics like bioethics
apply those philosophical principles to specific, real-world issues. The broad field of ethics
examines the boundaries of right and wrong. Within this broad field of study, there are several
branches of applied ethics: where ethical analysis is applied to specific controversies and moral
issues. Bioethics is one of the specific branches of applied ethics that studies the ethical
implications of issues in the fields of medicine and life sciences. This encompasses questions
about laboratory topics like cloning and stem cell research as well as more patient-focused moral
conundrums such as the use of life support or physician-assisted suicide. Physicians and
scientists throughout history have wrestled with these kinds of moral questions. The famous
Hippocratic Oath, for example, which guides the ethical decision-making of physicians, dates
back to the 5th century BC. The paper recommends that: there is need to apply strictly the ethical
principle to contemporary issues like genetic engineering, contraceptive technology and artificial
insemination. And scholars must be consistent in assessing the application of these ethical
principles in areas where there are necessary.

1
Introduction

Bioethics is the study of the ethical issues arising in relation to biological disciplines.

While focusing to a considerable extent on health care, it has also been taken to include

environmental issues. In addition to being an academic field of study, bioethics has had

reforming aspects. It is also multidisciplinary, including clinical, scientific, legal, sociological,

and religious approaches, as well as philosophical. A number of theoretical approaches can be

identified, including the ‘four principles’ of biomedical ethics, narrative ethics, virtue ethics and

feminist ethics, among others. This paper examines the main preoccupation of bioethics.

Understanding Bioethics

Bioethics is both a field of study and professional practice, interested in ethical issues

related to health (primarily focused on the human, but also increasingly includes animal ethics),

including those emerging from advances in biology, medicine, and technologies (Lolas 120). It

proposes the discussion about moral discernment in society (what decisions are "good" or "bad"

and why) and it is often related to medical policy and practice, but also to broader questions as

environment, well-being and public health ( Sass 280). Bioethics is concerned with the ethical

questions that arise in the relationships among life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics,

law, theology and philosophy. It includes the study of values relating to primary care, other

branches of medicine ("the ethics of the ordinary"), ethical education in science, animal, and

environmental ethics, and public health.

The specific term "bioethics" was first used in 1927 by Fritz Jahr in his article, "Bio-

Ethics: A Review of the Ethical Relationships of Humans to Animals and Plants." But it wasn't

until the 1960s that bioethics developed as a full-fledged field of study. During this period,

technologies related to medical procedures like organ transplantation and kidney dialysis were

2
advancing but were limited in scope and physicians were having to make decisions about which

patients would receive these life-saving treatments. Social movements — especially those related

to civil rights and gender equity — were asking questions about how the most marginalized in

society were being mistreated by systems dominated by the majority culture. These points in

history combined to create conditions under which scientists and laypeople alike were

recognizing the moral imperative for patients to receive better information to take a more active

role in decision-making related to their bodies.

Purpose and Scope

The discipline of bioethics has addressed a wide swathe of human inquiry; ranging from

debates over the boundaries of lifestyles (e.g. abortion, euthanasia), surrogacy, the allocation of

scarce health care resources (e.g. organ donation, health care rationing), to the right to refuse

medical care for religious or cultural reasons. Bioethicists generally fail to agree among

themselves over the precise limits of their discipline, debating whether the field should concern

itself with the ethical evaluation of all questions involving biology and medicine, or only a subset

of these questions (Lolas 121). Some bioethicists would narrow ethical evaluation only to the

morality of medical treatments or technological innovations, and the timing of medical treatment

of humans. Others would increase the scope of moral assessment to encompass the morality of

all moves that would possibly assist or damage organisms successful of feeling fear.

The scope of bioethics has expanded beyond biotechnology, and while including topics

such as cloning, gene therapy, life extension, human genetic engineering, it can also include

astroethics and life in space, and manipulation of basic biology through altered DNA, XNA and

proteins (Freemont and Kitney 34). These (and other) developments may affect future evolution

and require new principles that address life at its core, such as biotic ethics that values life itself

3
at its basic biological processes and structures, and seeks their propagation (Mautner 433).

Moving beyond the biological, issues raised in public health such as vaccination and resource

allocation have also encouraged the development of novel ethics frameworks to address such

challenges. A study published in 2022 based on the corpus of full papers from eight main

bioethics journals demonstrated the heterogeneity of this field by distinguishing 91 topics that

have been discussed in these journals over the past half a century (Bystranowski et al 902).

Principles

One of the first areas addressed by modern bioethicists was that of human

experimentation. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical

and Behavioral Research was initially established in 1974 to identify the basic ethical principles

that should underlie the conduct of biomedical and behavioral research involving human

subjects. However, the fundamental principles announced in the Belmont Report (1979)—

namely, respect for persons, beneficence and justice—have influenced the thinking of

bioethicists across a wide range of issues. Others have added non-maleficence, human dignity,

and the sanctity of life to this list of cardinal values. Overall, the Belmont Report has guided

lookup in a course centered on defending prone topics as properly as pushing for transparency

between the researcher and the subject. Research has flourished within the past 40 years and due

to the advance in technology, it is thought that human subjects have outgrown the Belmont

Report, and the need for revision is desired (Friesen 16).

Another essential precept of bioethics is its placement of cost on dialogue and

presentation. Numerous dialogue based totally bioethics corporations exist in universities

throughout the United States to champion precisely such goals. Professional level versions of

these organizations also exist. Many bioethicists, in particular scientific scholars, accord the

4
easiest precedence to autonomy. They trust that every affected person ought to decide which

direction of motion they think about most in line with their beliefs. In other words, the patient

should always have the freedom to choose their own treatment (Entwistle 902).

Medical Ethics

Medical ethics is a utilized department of ethics that analyzes the exercise of clinical

medicinal drug and associated scientific research. Medical ethics is based totally on a set of

values that gurus can refer to in the case of any confusion or conflict. These values consist of the

appreciation for autonomy, beneficence, and justice.

Ethics affects medical decisions made by healthcare providers and patients (Horne 588).

Medical ethics is the study of moral values and judgments as they apply to medicine. The four

main moral commitments are respect for autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice.

Using these four principles and thinking about what the physicians' specific concern is for their

scope of practice can help physicians make moral decisions. As a scholarly discipline, medical

ethics encompasses its practical application in clinical settings as well as work on its history,

philosophy, theology, and sociology (Orfali 76).

Medical ethics tends to be understood narrowly as applied professional ethics; whereas

bioethics has a more expansive application, touching upon the philosophy of science and issues

of biotechnology. The two fields often overlap, and the distinction is more so a matter of style

than professional consensus. Medical ethics shares many principles with other branches of

healthcare ethics, such as nursing ethics. A bioethicist assists the health care and research

community in examining moral issues involved in our understanding of life and death, and

resolving ethical dilemmas in medicine and science. Examples of this would be the topic of

5
equality in medicine, the intersection of cultural practices and medical care, ethical distribution

of healthcare resources in pandemics and issues of bioterrorism (Hauschildt and De Vries 234).

Medical ethical concerns frequently touch on matters of life and death. Patient rights,

informed consent, confidentiality, competency, advance directives, carelessness, and many other

topics are highlighted as serious health concerns. The proper actions to take in light of all the

circumstances are what ethics is all about. It discusses the difference between what is proper and

wrong at a certain moment and a particular society. Medical ethics is concerned with the duties

that doctors, hospitals, and other healthcare providers have to patients, society, and other health

professionals.

The health profession has a set of ethical standards that are relevant to various

organizations of health workers and medical facilities. Ethics are never stagnant and always

relevant. What is seen as acceptable ethics now may not be so one hundred years ago. The

hospital administrator is required to have a thorough awareness of their moral and legal

obligations (Markose 1).

The practice of bioethics in clinical care have been studied by medical sociology. Many

scholars consider that bioethics arose in response to a perceived lack of accountability in medical

care in the 1970s.: 2 Studying the clinical practice of ethics in medical care, Hauschildt and Vries

found that ethical questions were often reframed as clinical judgments to allow clinicians to

make decisions. Ethicists most often put key decisions in the hands of physicians rather than

patients (235).

Perspectives and methodology

Bioethicists come from a wide variety of backgrounds and have training in a diverse

array of disciplines. The field contains individuals trained in philosophy such as Baruch Brody of

6
Rice University, Arthur Caplan of NYU, Peter Singer of Princeton University, Daniel Callahan

of the Hastings Center, and Daniel Brock of Harvard University; medically trained clinician

ethicists such as Mark Siegler of the University of Chicago and Joseph Fins of Cornell

University; lawyers such as Nancy Dubler of Albert Einstein College of Medicine or Jerry

Menikoff of the federal Office for Human Research Protections; political scientists like Francis

Fukuyama; religious studies scholars including James Childress; and theologians like Lisa Sowle

Cahill and Stanley Hauerwas. The field, formerly dominated by formally trained philosophers,

has become increasingly interdisciplinary, with some critics even claiming that the methods of

analytic philosophy have harmed the field's development. Leading journals in the field include

The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, the Hastings Center Report, the American Journal of

Bioethics, the Journal of Medical Ethics, Bioethics, the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal and

the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. Bioethics has also benefited from the process

philosophy developed by Alfred North Whitehead (de Vrie 87).

Recommendations

The paper makes the following recommendations:

i. There is need to apply strictly the ethical principle to contemporary issues like genetic

engineering, contraceptive technology and artificial insemination.

ii. Scholars must be consistent in assessing the application of these ethical principles in

areas where there are necessary.

Conclusion

Bioethics is a sub-field of applied ethics. Ethics as a whole is a philosophical field of

study that grapples with questions of what is right and what is wrong, and applied ethics like

bioethics apply those philosophical principles to specific, real-world issues. The broad field of

7
ethics examines the boundaries of right and wrong. Within this broad field of study, there are

several branches of applied ethics: where ethical analysis is applied to specific controversies and

moral issues. Bioethics is one of the specific branches of applied ethics that studies the ethical

implications of issues in the fields of medicine and life sciences. This encompasses questions

about laboratory topics like cloning and stem cell research as well as more patient-focused moral

conundrums such as the use of life support or physician-assisted suicide. Physicians and

scientists throughout history have wrestled with these kinds of moral questions. The famous

Hippocratic Oath, for example, which guides the ethical decision-making of physicians, dates

back to the 5th century BC.

8
 WORKS CITED

Bystranowski, Piotr. et al. "Half a century of bioethics and philosophy of medicine: A topic‐

modeling study". Bioethics. 36 (9): 2022. 902–925.

Entwistle, V.A. Carter, S.M. Cribb, A. McCaffery, K. "Supporting patient autonomy: the

importance of clinician-patient relationships" (PDF). Journal of General Internal

Medicine. 25 (7): 2010. 741–745.

Friesen P, Kearns L, Redman B, Caplan, A.L. "Rethinking the Belmont Report?". The American

Journal of Bioethics. 17 (7): 2017.15–21.

Hauschildt, K, De Vries, R. "Reinforcing medical authority: clinical ethics consultation and the

resolution of conflicts in treatment decisions". Sociology of Health and Illness. 42 (2):

2020. 307–326.

Horne, L.C. "Medical Need, Equality, and Uncertainty". Bioethics. 30 (8): 2016.588–96.

Lolas, F. "Bioethics and animal research: a personal perspective and a note on the contribution of

Fritz Jahr". Biological Research. 41 (1): 2008. 119–123.

Markose, Aji; Krishnan, Ramesh; Ramesh, Maya. "Medical ethics". Journal of Pharmacy &

Bioallied Sciences. 8 (Suppl 1): 2016. S1–S4.

Orfali, K, de Vries, R. "Bioethics". The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Medical Sociology. John

Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2021. 82–101.

Sass, H.M. "Fritz Jahr's 1927 concept of bioethics". Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. 17 (4):

2007.279–295.