Religion and global bioethics: Religious global bioethics as a precursor to a universal bioethics. From a general public perspective, this article presumes that there is such a thing as a universal ethics; however this assumption does not decrease the challenges with regard to a ‘global ethics’ and ‘bioethics’. The article discusses the views on global religious bioethics that were formulated in 1999. The article further considers these formulations as the forerunner of UNESCO’s perspective on universal bioethics accepted in 2005. The (...) article aims to argue that a global value system will enhance hope of peace and justice in today’s global world. It argues that the absence of shared ethics will reinforce conflict between civilisations and worsen injustice. (shrink)

In 2005, the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization was accepted unanimously by the world community, consisting of 191 member nations, which means that the declaration is currently the first and only bioethical text to which the entire world has committed itself. It must be borne in mind, though, that this document, particularly Article 7 of the UDBHR, is not of religious origin and must therefore be evaluated from a Christian (...) point of view. This article strives to ground the ethical and human-rights issue of substitute consent from a Reformed perspective. The grounding is performed in light of the creation and salvation perspectives. (shrink)

In the development and acceptance of Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights, the United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization did not involve the Protestant faith tradition in the consultation process. This brings the universality as well as the acceptability of the Declaration and its principles into question. In order to address this issue, it is necessary to involve the Protestant tradition in the discourse by presenting own reasons that support the universal principles in the (...) Declaration. This discourse has shown that respect for cultural diversity, pluralism and the priority of universal shared values can be grounded from a Trinitarian perspective; therefore, the appeal of the Declaration to consider this principle seriously in the field of bioethics can be supported by the Protestant religious tradition. (shrink)

The South African government announced the much-discussed stay-at-home order between March 27 and April 30, 2020, during what was known as lockdown level 5, which meant that citizens were not allowed to leave their homes. The objective of this study is to assess the stay-at-home order against the global principles of the UDBHR. It is deducible that, in reference to the UDBHR, the government possessed the right to curtail individual liberty, thereby not infringing on Article 5 of the UDBHR and (...) therefore, in this context, passes the test of the UDBHR. However, it remains uncertain at present whether the limitation of freedom imposed by the South African stay-at-home order was successful in controlling the spread of COVID-19 and protecting individuals from harm. Initial investigations also indicate that individuals who are particularly vulnerable may not have received equitable treatment in accordance with the principle outlined in Article 10, therefore, it can be cautiously and modestly argued that the stay-at-home order does not withstand scrutiny when assessed against the UDBHR. Given the continued discussion about the efficacy of limiting freedom to control the spread of COVID-19, and the growing conviction that the advancement of justice is being called into question, the notion of least restriction ought to be considered seriously. Ten Have (2022) is correct in asserting that global bioethics should also seriously consider other principles beyond an almost exclusive focus on limiting individual freedom. The preliminary conclusion is that the potential implementation of the stay-at-home order in the future must be seriously reconsidered. (shrink)

It is clear that corruption as the abuse of power is an enormous bioethical issue in the public health sector in SA, but as a challenge, it has not elicited much discussion from a global bioethical perspective. The Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights on corruption considers three matters. First, the existence of corruption as a problem of power is recognised in the health environment and condemned. Second, corruption is indicated as an immoral phenomenon that harms the interests of (...) the patient, ignores vulnerable people and neglects social responsibility. Third, it can be concluded that the UDBHR expresses the opinion that corruption has to be combated by a process of ethical decision-making, the use of ethics committees and ethics education. (shrink)