The Central and East European Association of Bioethics, CEEAB, was founded in the Hungarian city of Pecs, on 6 February 1999, at a meeting of scholars from Croatia, Hungry, Lithuania, Slovakia, and Russia. The meeting was supported by the Soros Foundation and the Albert Schweitzer Institute for the Humanities.

In the early 1990s, the primary problem in Russian bioethics was to gain the attention and recognition of the public and the medical establishment. Very few people were even familiar with the word “bioethics.” Within medical education, only a paternalistic and scholastic “medical deontology” was viewed as the professionally acceptable way to deal with the existing moral problems. The public was ignorant of the rights of patients and consumers of medical services. The usual way of resolving conflicts between patients and (...) physicians was to complain to medical authorities. Very few cases of disputes were brought to the courts. Representatives of religious groups did not participate in discussions involving dilemmas generated by progress in biomedical technologies, and they did not seek to influence legislation in this area. (shrink)

I graduated from, medical school in 1972. According to orders signed at the Kremlin by the Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, I was obliged, along with every graduating medical student, to swear to a new professional code, “The Oath of the Soviet Physicians.” This was the second year the oath was used. Incorporated in the oath were promises to “conduct all my actions according to the principles of the Communist morality, to always keep in mind … the (...) high responsibility I have to my people and to the Soviet government” I felt no discomfort joining with my friends in repeating words about the communist morality which by that time had already become a ritualized and meaningless official decoration of our life. The text of this oath fit into the political and medical ideology of that time. Not surprisingly, “The Oath of the Soviet Physicians” died along with the Soviet Union. (shrink)

The healthcare system in the new Russia is in an agonizing flux of political, economic, and ideological turmoil. The individual in this system, comfortable with the long-established policies of the former Soviet system, is now confronted with instability, rapid change, and an uncertain future.

In the last 7 years, Russia has seen deep changes in all spheres of political and economic life. Some new realities have appeared in Russian medicine as well. This paper tells the story of how these changes came about, what kind of unusal situation were created, and how these situation are recognized in professional and public debates.

Starting bioethics in Russia we were motivated with the idea of the democratization of our society on a basic micro-social level. The country was swift enough to take several important steps in this direction on the macro-social level, i.e., to adopt a new constitution with guarantees of human rights and rights of ownership of private property, to elect the parliament and the president. But these modernizations in the Russian political facade did not sufficiently change the internal structure of the society–the (...) net of everyday relationships in the home, at work, at school, in hospitals and other places. One of the most brilliant philosophers of the Russian “silver age,” L.S. Frank, wrote in the beginning of the century that a tyrannical state grows out of tyrannical interpersonal relationships. Political revolution not grounded in a social evolution on the basic level of satisfying “simple” human economic, physical, and psychological needs could reproduce only the same totalitarian pattern under a new ideological label. Events resulting from the Bolshevik revolution in 1917 proved the wisdom of his statement. Russia could suffer the same fate today. (shrink)