Promises and perils of public deliberation: Contrasting two national bioethics commissions on embryonic stem cell research
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (3):269-288 (2005)
: National bioethics commissions have struggled to develop ethically warranted methods for conducting their deliberations. The National Bioethics Advisory Commission in its report on stem cell research adopted an approach to public deliberation indebted to Rawls in that it sought common ground consistent with shared values and beliefs at the foundation of a well-ordered democracy. In contrast, although the research cloning and stem cell research reports of the President's Council on Bioethics reveal that it broached two different methods of public deliberation—balancing goods and following an overarching moral principle—it adopted neither. Thereupon its prime mover, Leon Kass, influenced particularly by the approach of Leo Strauss, sought to develop a method of public deliberation guided by tradition and practical wisdom. When this failed, the Council fell back on a method that took account of shared fundamental values of a free democracy—a method remarkably akin to that employed by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Respect for diverse reasonable conceptions of the good in a democratic polity requires national bioethics commissions to seek and incorporate that which is valuable in opposing positions
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
LeRoy Walters (2004). Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Intercultural Perspective. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (1):3-38.
Miriam Brouillet & Leigh Turner (2005). Bioethics, Religion, and Democratic Deliberation: Policy Formation and Embryonic Stem Cell Research. [REVIEW] HEC Forum 17 (1):49-63.
Elisa Eiseman (2003). The National Bioethics Advisory Commission: Contributing to Public Policy. Rand.
Matthew Weed (2004). Ethics, Regulation, and Biomedical Research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (4):361-368.
Norman K. Swazo (2010). “Just One Animal Among Many?” Existential Phenomenology, Ethics, and Stem Cell Research. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (3):197-224.
Albert W. Dzur & Daniel Lessard Levin (2004). The "Nation's Conscience:" Assessing Bioethics Commissions as Public Forums. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (4):333-360.
Myra J. Christopher (2007). "Show Me" Bioethics and Politics. American Journal of Bioethics 7 (10):28 – 33.
Glenn McGee & Arthur L. Caplan (1999). The Ethics and Politics of Small Sacrifices in Stem Cell Research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 9 (2):151-158.
Laurie Zoloth (2002). Stem Cell Research: A Target Article Collection Part I - Jordan's Banks, a View From the First Years of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. American Journal of Bioethics 2 (1):3 – 11.
Summer Johnson (2006). Multiple Roles and Successes in Public Bioethics: A Response to the Public Forum Critique of Bioethics Commissions. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (2):173-188.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads20 ( #83,657 of 1,099,017 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #27,186 of 1,099,017 )
How can I increase my downloads?