31 found
Order:
Disambiguations:
Raymond De Vries [25]Raymond G. de Vries [6]
  1.  48
    Melissa S. Anderson, Emily A. Ronning, Raymond De Vries & Brian C. Martinson (2007). The Perverse Effects of Competition on Scientists' Work and Relationships. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (4):437-461.
    Competition among scientists for funding, positions and prestige, among other things, is often seen as a salutary driving force in U.S. science. Its effects on scientists, their work and their relationships are seldom considered. Focus-group discussions with 51 mid- and early-career scientists, on which this study is based, reveal a dark side of competition in science. According to these scientists, competition contributes to strategic game-playing in science, a decline in free and open sharing of information and methods, sabotage of others’ (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   16 citations  
  2.  51
    Carlo Leget, Pascal Borry & Raymond de Vries (2009). 'Nobody Tosses a Dwarf!' The Relation Between the Empirical and the Normative Reexamined. Bioethics 23 (4):226-235.
    This article discusses the relation between empirical and normative approaches in bioethics. The issue of dwarf tossing, while admittedly unusual, is chosen as a point of departure because it challenges the reader to look with fresh eyes upon several central bioethical themes, including human dignity, autonomy, and the protection of vulnerable people. After an overview of current approaches to the integration of empirical and normative ethics, we consider five ways that the empirical and normative can be brought together to speak (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   12 citations  
  3.  4
    Subrata Chattopadhyay, Catherine Myser & Raymond De Vries (2015). Retracted Article: Imperialism in Bioethics: How Policies of Profit Negate Engagement of Developing World Bioethicists and Undermine Global Bioethics. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 12 (4):727-728.
    How do bioethics gatekeepers located in wealthy nations treat bioethics workers from developing countries? Can the policies of leading international bioethics journals—based on a concern for profit that effectively restricts access for most researchers from developing countries—be ethically justified? We examined these policies focusing on the way they influence the ability of researchers in resource-poor countries to participate in the development of the field of bioethics. Eight of the fourteen leading bioethics journals are published by three transnational publishing houses, all (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4. Scott Y. H. Kim, Lauren Schrock, Renee M. Wilson, Samuel A. Frank, Robert G. Holloway, Karl Kieburtz & Raymond G. De Vries (2009). An Approach to Evaluating Therapeutic Misconception. IRB: Ethics & Human Research 31 (5):7.
    Subjects enrolled in studies testing high risk interventions for incurable or progressive brain diseases may be vulnerable to deficiencies in informed consent, such as the therapeutic misconception. However, the definition and measurement of the therapeutic misconception is a subject of continuing debate. Our qualitative pilot study of persons enrolled in a phase I trial of gene transfer for Parkinson disease suggests potential avenues for both measuring and preventing the therapeutic misconception. Building on earlier literature on the topic, we developed and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  5.  8
    Subrata Chattopadhyay & Raymond De Vries (2013). Respect for Cultural Diversity in Bioethics is an Ethical Imperative. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 16 (4):639-645.
    The field of bioethics continues to struggle with the problem of cultural diversity: can universal principles guide ethical decision making, regardless of the culture in which those decisions take place? Or should bioethical principles be derived from the moral traditions of local cultures? Ten Have and Gordijn and Bracanovic defend the universalist position, arguing that respect for cultural diversity in matters ethical will lead to a dangerous cultural relativity where vulnerable patients and research subjects will be harmed. We challenge the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  6.  32
    Aasim I. Padela, Aisha Y. Malik, Farr Curlin & Raymond De Vries (2015). [Re]Considering Respect for Persons in a Globalizing World. Developing World Bioethics 15 (2):98-106.
    Contemporary clinical ethics was founded on principlism, and the four principles: respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence and justice, remain dominant in medical ethics discourse and practice. These principles are held to be expansive enough to provide the basis for the ethical practice of medicine across cultures. Although principlism remains subject to critique and revision, the four-principle model continues to be taught and applied across the world. As the practice of medicine globalizes, it remains critical to examine the extent to which (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  3
    Judy Illes, Raymond de Vries, Mildred Cho & Pam Schraedley-Desmond (2006). ELSI Priorities for Brain Imaging. American Journal of Bioethics 6 (2):W24-W31.
    As one of the most compelling technologies for imaging the brain, functional MRI (fMRI) produces measurements and persuasive pictures of research subjects making cognitive judgments and even reasoning through difficult moral decisions. Even after centuries of studying the link between brain and behavior, this capability presents a number of novel significant questions. For example, what are the implications of biologizing human experience? How might neuroimaging disrupt the mysteries of human nature, spirituality, and personal identity? Rather than waiting for an ethical (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  8.  10
    Subrata Chattopadhyay, Catherine Myser & Raymond De Vries (2013). Bioethics and Its Gatekeepers: Does Institutional Racism Exist in Leading Bioethics Journals? [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 10 (1):7-9.
    Who are the gatekeepers in bioethics? Does editorial bias or institutional racism exist in leading bioethics journals? We analyzed the composition of the editorial boards of 14 leading bioethics journals by country. Categorizing these countries according to their Human Development Index (HDI), we discovered that approximately 95 percent of editorial board members are based in (very) high-HDI countries, less than 4 percent are from medium-HDI countries, and fewer than 1.5 percent are from low-HDI countries. Eight out of 14 leading bioethics (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  9.  30
    Raymond de Vries (2011). The Uses and Abuses of Moral Theory in Bioethics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (4):419-430.
    Moral theory is an important guide to bioethical decision-making, but it can confuse and mislead those who offer ethical advice to clinicians and researchers, delaying decisions that must be made in a timely fashion. In this paper I examine the ways moral theory can lead bioethicists astray. Absent a sensitivity to the empirical realities of ethical problems, moral theory 1) contributes to the disappearance of the persons caught in an ethical quandary, 2) focuses on the puzzle-solving rather than examining the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  10. Raymond de Vries & Leslie Rott (2011). Bioethics as Missionary Work : The Export of Western Ethics to Developing Countries. In Catherine Myser (ed.), Bioethics Around the Globe. Oxford University Press
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  11.  17
    Raymond de Vries & Carl P. Forsberg (2002). Who Decides? A Look at Ethics Committee Membership. HEC Forum 14 (3):252-258.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  12. Subrata Chattopadhyay & Raymond de Vries (2008). Bioethical Concerns Are Global, Bioethics is Western. Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 18 (4):106-109.
    Modern bioethics was born in the West and thus reflects, not surprisingly, the traditions of Western moral philosophy and political and social theory. When the work of bioethics was confined to the West, this background of socio-political theory and moral tradition posed few problems, but as bioethics has moved into other cultures – inside and outside of the Western world – it has become an agent of moral imperialism. We describe the moral imperialism of bioethics, discuss its dangers, and suggest (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  13.  1
    Scott Y. H. Kim, Raymond De Vries, Robert G. Holloway & Karl Kieburtz (forthcoming). Understanding the ‘Therapeutic Misconception’ From the Research Participant’s Perspective. Journal of Medical Ethics:medethics-2016-103597.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  9
    Raymond De Vries, Debra A. DeBruin & Andrew Goodgame (2004). Ethics Review of Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research: Where Should We Go From Here'. Ethics and Behavior 14 (4):351 – 368.
    It is not unusual for researchers to complain about institutional review board (IRB) oversight, but social scientists have a unique set of objections to the work of ethics committees. In an effort to better understand the problems associated with ethics review of social, behavioral, and economic sciences (SBES) research, this article examines 3 different aspects of research ethics committees: (a) the composition of review boards; (b) the guidelines used by these boards to review SBES - and in particular, behavioral health (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  15.  2
    Raymond G. De Vries & Scott Y. H. Kim (2008). Bioethics and the Sociology of Trust: Introduction to the Theme. [REVIEW] Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 11 (4):377-379.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  16.  18
    Raymond De Vries (2005). Framing Neuroethics: A Sociological Assessment of the Neuroethical Imagination. American Journal of Bioethics 5 (2):25 – 27.
  17.  10
    Raymond de Vries (2009). Why Can't We All Just Get Along? A Comment on Turner's Plea to Social Scientists and Bioethicists. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 18 (1):43.
    Okay, Professor Turner is not Rodney King. He is not responding to bioethicists and social scientists running amuck, setting automobiles aflame, and pelting each other with rocks and broken bottles. He does not come right out and ask, “Why can't we all just get along?” But in its academic way, Turner's essay is an effort to negotiate a truce in the interdisciplinary squabbles that plague bioethics, a plea to move bioethics beyond the “misleading” and “unhelpful” “demarcation of disciplinary goals” that (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  18.  2
    Scott Y. H. Kim, Raymond De Vries, Sonali Parnami, Renee Wilson, H. Myra Kim, Samuel Frank, Robert G. Holloway & Karl Kieburtz (2015). Are Therapeutic Motivation and Having One's Own Doctor as Researcher Sources of Therapeutic Misconception? Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (5):391-397.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19.  1
    Raymond G. De Vries & Charles L. Bosk (2004). The Bioethics of Business: Rethinking the Relationship Between Bioethics Consultants and Corporate Clients. Hastings Center Report 34 (5):28-32.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20.  9
    Sonali S. Parnami, Katherine Y. Lin, Kathryn Bondy Fessler, Erica Blom, Matthew Sullivan & Raymond G. de Vries (2012). From Pioneers to Professionals. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (01):104-115.
    Bioethics has made remarkable progress as a scholarly and applied field. A mere fledgling in the 1960s, it is now firmly established in hospitals, medical schools, and government agencies and boasts a number of professional associations and a handsome collection of journals.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  9
    Raymond de Vries, Nancy Berlinger & Wendy Cadge (2008). Lost in Translation: The Chaplain's Role in Health Care. Hastings Center Report 38 (6):23-27.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  9
    Raymond G. de Vries (2009). Among Bioethicists. Hastings Center Report 39 (5):46-47.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  7
    Raymond De Vries (2008). The Prepositions of Bioethics. Hastings Center Report 38 (3):pp. c3-c3.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24.  2
    Raymond De Vries & Leslie Rott (2011). The Export of Western Ethics to Developing Countries. In Catherine Myser (ed.), Bioethics Around the Globe. Oxford University Press
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  1
    Loes Kater, Rob Houtepen, Raymond De Vries & Guy Widdershoven (2003). Health Care Ethics and Health Law in the Dutch Discussion on End-of-Life Decisions: A Historical Analysis of the Dynamics and Development of Both Disciplines. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 34 (4):669-684.
    Over the past three or four decades, the concept of medical ethics has changed from a limited set of standards to a broad field of debate and research. We define medical ethics as an arena of moral issues in medicine, rather than a specific discipline. This paper examines how the disciplines of health care ethics and health care law have developed and operated within this arena. Our framework highlights the aspects of jurisdiction and the assignment of responsibilities . This theoretical (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  1
    Raymond de Vries & Carla Keirns (2008). Does Money Make Bioethics Go 'Round? American Journal of Bioethics 8 (8):65-67.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Raymond G. De Vries (2009). ”Among Bioethicists: EckenwilerLisa A.„ Ed.1967-Ethics of Bioethics: Mapping the Moral Landscape. Hastings Center Report 39 (5):46-47.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Raymond De Vries, Nancy Berlinger & Wendy Cadge (forthcoming). Lost in Translation? Sociological Observations and Reflections on the Practice of Hospital Chaplaincy. Hastings Center Report.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. Raymond De Vries (2009). Open to Interpretation Reply. Hastings Center Report 39 (4):4-5.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Loes Kater, Rob Houtepen, Raymond De Vries & Guy Widdershoven (2003). Health Care Ethics and Health Law in the Dutch Discussion on End-of-Life Decisions: A Historical Analysis of the Dynamics and Development of Both Disciplines. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 34 (4):669-684.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Mansooreh Saniei & Raymond de Vries (2008). Monotheistic Religions' Perspectives on Embryonic Stem Cell Research. Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 18 (2):45-50.
    The controversy about research on human embryonic stem cells raises many fundamental ethical and religious questions, especially about the sanctity of lifeand the Divine mandate of human dominion over nature. This paper reviews the different perspectives of three monotheistic religions on the use of embryo for stem cell research. Looking at the religious perspectives, it shows us that Islam and Judaism support most forms of stem cell research. Both of them express their beliefs on when life begins or what the (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography