暂无摘要。

This essay analyzes from a personalistic bioethics the model of technological progress supported by an autonomy without controls and an imperative that is governed by the maxim: if it can be done, let\'s do it!, as a necessary and sufficient condition of progress. This puts us on the slippery slope between the technically feasible and the morally lawful. The pioneering work of the philosopher, José Sanmartin Esplugues 2 , urges reflection in the face of a technological profusion that sees the human being as a useful embodied object and offers powers of intervention on human life that were previously unimaginable. The reduction of the person to mere biological-material data opens the door to increasing deshumanization by subordination to the calculations of an instrumental rationalism. Underlying the desire to see ourselves at the top of the world and genetic techniques are the ultimate expression of a longing for human emancipation that aspires to take the reins of evolution through an abstract postbiological imaginary. Sanmartin proposes a model of ethical evaluation and social insertion of technoscientific activity that goes beyond the conventional categories of impact, use and effectiveness to distinguish social, cultural, economic, political and values correlates, in order to embroider a pattern that decides on the means and ends of human life through technologies that are neither innocuous nor neutral. A society without antidotes to manipulation that also teaches us to cultivate utopian dreams about human nature is easily malleable by elites who promise happy worlds and redeem us from our vulnerability.

Facial recognition technology (FRT) has emerged as a powerful tool for public governance and security, but its rapid adoption has also raised significant concerns about privacy, civil liberties, and ethical implications. This paper critically examines the current rules and policies governing FRT, highlighting the tensions between state and corporate interests on one hand, and individual rights and ethical considerations on the other. The study also investigates international legal frameworks aimed at protecting individual rights and privacy, arguing that current legislative measures often fall short of robust scholarly standards and international human rights norms. The paper concludes with recommendations for developing principled and adaptable governance frameworks that harness the benefits of FRT while mitigating its risks and negative impacts, underscoring the importance of placing human rights and ethics at the center of regulating this transformative technology.

In this paper, I leverage the pragmatist tradition in philosophy, the collective wisdom of scholarship in clinical ethics consultation, and earlier attempts to apply pragmatism in clinical ethics to develop a new vision of clinical ethics practice called New Clinical Pragmatism. It argues that clinical ethics methodology, from the New Clinical Pragmatist\'s perspective, amounts to the recommendation that consultants should customize a methodological approach, drawing on the various available methods, depending on the demands of the specific case, and should avoid attempts to identify a \'true\' methodology but to the incoherence and inevitable failure of those attempts. I argue that pragmatism\'s emphasis on practical wisdom and experimentation allow the New Clinical Pragmatist to do this while avoiding irrationality in choosing methods. I discuss how the New Clinical Pragmatist gives a unique, constructive perspective on key aspects of clinical ethics consultation such as the choice of common morality vs. internal morality of medicine approaches, process standards, bioethics mediation, and narrative ethics, and suggest how New Clinical Pragmatism\'s relaxed approach to choice of methodology encourages consultants to balance attention to the particulars of the case with knowledge of what the many insightful scholars of clinical ethics methodology have found useful in the past. I also argue that New Clinical Pragmatism is consistent with efforts to professionalize clinical ethics consultation.

This article starts by examining the present state of death ethics by attending to the euthanasia debate. Given that voluntary active euthanasia has seen strong support in the academic community, insights on the choiceworthiness of continued existence may be derived. Having derived cases of choiceworthy nonexistence (which I refer to as choiceworthy nonexistence [CNE] cases), I extend these intuitions to lives not worth starting, or choiceworthy nonexistence for potential people (which I refer to as foetal-CNE, or fCNE cases). Although I depart from Benatarian antinatalism by rejecting Benatar\'s claim that all existence is necessarily a harm, I posit a weaker argument that all existence is likely a harm since we cannot know until later in life if an existence is a harm. If I am right, then we have prudential reasons not to bear children, since they are more likely to suffer in lives not worth living than not.

A growing trend in bioethics highlights the importance of using big data science methods to advance normative insight. This has been called the \"digital turn\" in bioethics by Salloch and Ursin. Automated data processing can, for example, detect significant patterns of correlation that have escaped the attention of human scholars. Although we agree that such technological innovations could bolster existing methods in empirical bioethics (EB), we argue that it should not be conceptualized as a new turn but rather as a revivification, and possibly an amplification of entrenched debates in EB. We begin by highlighting some convergences between EB and digital bioethics that Salloch and Ursin seem to categorize as fundamental differences and end up with elaborating on some risks related to the integration of empirical findings with normative (philosophical) analysis in the digitalization trend.

Health Recommender Systems are promising Articial-Intelligence-based tools endowing healthy lifestyles and therapy adherence in healthcare and medicine. Among the most supported areas, it is worth mentioning active aging. However, current HRS supporting AA raise ethical challenges that still need to be properly formalized and explored. This study proposes to rethink HRS for AA through an autonomy-based ethical analysis. In particular, a brief overview of the HRS\' technical aspects allows us to shed light on the ethical risks and challenges they might raise on individuals\' well-being as they age. Moreover, the study proposes a categorization, understanding, and possible preventive/mitigation actions for the elicited risks and challenges through rethinking the AI ethics core principle of autonomy. Finally, elaborating on autonomy-related ethical theories, the paper proposes an autonomy-based ethical framework and how it can foster the development of autonomy-enabling HRS for AA.

Technological advancements before and after delivery have greatly altered the counseling of pregnant patients facing a fetal diagnosis of severe oligohydramnios or anhydramnios secondary to congenital anomalies of the kidneys and urinary tract. Once considered a nearly uniformly lethal abnormality, long-term survival may now be possible secondary to prenatal innovations aimed at restoring the amniotic fluid volume and the availability of more advanced neonatal dialysis techniques. However, these available therapies are far from perfect. The procedures are onerous for pregnant patients without a guarantee of success, and families must prepare themselves for the complex life-long medical care that will be necessary for surviving individuals. Multidisciplinary counseling is imperative to help pregnant individuals understand the complexity of these conditions and assist them in exercising their right to informed decision-making. Moreover, as with any developing field of medicine, providers must contend with ethical questions related to the treatment options, including questions regarding patient-hood, distributive justice, and the blurred lines between research, innovation, and standard care. These ethical questions are best addressed in a multidisciplinary fashion with consideration of multiple points of view from various subspecialties. Only by seeing the entirety of the picture can we hope to best counsel patients about these highly complex situations and help navigate the most appropriate care path.

Artificial gametes, derived from stem cells, have the potential to enable in vitro fertilization of embryos. Currently, artificial gametes are only being generated in laboratory animals; however, considerable efforts are underway to develop artificial gametes using human cell sources. These artificial gametes are being proposed as a means to address infertility through assisted reproductive technologies. Nonetheless, the availability of artificial gametes obtained from adult organisms can potentially expand the possibilities of reproduction. Various groups, such as same-sex couples, post-menopausal women, and deceased donors, could potentially utilize artificial gametes to conceive genetically related offspring. The advent of artificial gametes raises significant bioethical questions. Should all these reproductive scenarios be accepted? How can we delineate the range of future reproductive choices? A normative bioethical framework may be necessary to establish a consensus regarding the use of human artificial gametes. This review aims to present the current state of research on the biological roadmap for generating artificial gametes, while also summarizing proposed approaches to establish a normative framework that delineates ethically acceptable paths for reproduction.

AbstractEmpirical studies of pediatric clinical ethics cases are scant in the biomedical and bioethics literature. In this study, more than 100 detailed records of clinical ethics consultations spanning from 2000 to 2020 at a moderately sized U.S. Mid-Atlantic children\'s hospital were abstracted and analyzed. Findings of the analysis were generally consistent with other studies in pediatric clinical ethics, with additional insight into aspects of moral distress associated with cases, family engagement with consultations, and other characteristics of interest also documented. Over the 20-year time frame, ethics consults were completed on average twice a year, with a detectable upward trend. Consultations were requested across the spectrum of services and units within the hospital, with critical care environments represented most frequently and genetic and neurological conditions being the most common primary diagnoses. Ethical analysis most commonly related to questions around the principles of autonomy and beneficence.