David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Health Care Analysis 9 (3):265-281 (2001)
The author demonstrates that professional bioethics is culturally very risk averse when it comes to evaluating the possible ethical consequences of new technologies such as genetic testing, human embryonic stem cells, and reproductive cloning. Deeper involvement in the Federal regulatory process by bioethicists will exacerbate this tendency toward risk aversion. This cultural bias toward caution will tempt many bioethicists to look to the so-called precautionary principle for policy guidance. Adopting the precautionary principle would harm patients by slowing the development of new therapies. The author argues that bioethicists should reject the precautionary principle and instead rely on conscientious trial and error as a superior way to approach implementing new biomedical technologies ethically
|Keywords||bioethics biotechnology ethics genetic enhancement genetic testing germline intervention human embryonic stem cells life extension new technology precautionary principle regulation reproductive cloning risk aversion therapeutic cloning xenotransplantation|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Steve Clarke (2005). Future Technologies, Dystopic Futures and the Precautionary Principle. Ethics and Information Technology 7 (3):121-126.
William M. Sage (2010). Will Embryonic Stem Cells Change Health Policy? Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (2):342-351.
Madison Powers & Ruth Faden (2008). Social Justice: The Moral Foundations of Public Health and Health Policy. Oup Usa.
Jonathan Hughes (2006). How Not to Criticize the Precautionary Principle. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 31 (5):447 – 464.
Julia Tao Lai Po-wah (1999). Does It Really Care? The Harvard Report on Health Care Reform for Hong Kong. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 24 (6):571 – 590.
Russell Powell (2010). What's the Harm? An Evolutionary Theoretical Critique of the Precautionary Principle. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 20 (2):181-206.
Roberta Berry, Lisa Bliss, Sylvia Caley, Paul Lombardo, Jerri Rooker, Jonathan Todres & Leslie Wolf (2010). Recent Developments in Health Care Law: Partners in Innovation. [REVIEW] HEC Forum 22 (2):85-116.
M. Berry Roberta, Sylvia Caley Lisa Bliss, A. Lombardo Paul, Jonathan Todres Jerri Nims Rooker & E. Wolf Leslie (forthcoming). Recent Developments in Health Care Law: Partners in Innovation. HEC Forum.
Mark Coeckelbergh (2010). Health Care, Capabilities, and Ai Assistive Technologies. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (2):181 - 190.
Daniel P. Sulmasy (1993). What's so Special About Medicine? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 14 (1):379-380.
Carl F. Cranor (2004). Toward Understanding Aspects of the Precautionary Principle. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (3):259 – 279.
Bart Gremmen & Henk Van Den Belt (2000). The Precautionary Principle and Pesticides. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12 (2):197-205.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads5 ( #259,933 of 1,679,387 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #183,003 of 1,679,387 )
How can I increase my downloads?