This blog post will appear in a future issue of the American Journal of Bioethics
by Nita Farahany, JD, PhD; Saheel Chodavadia; and Sara H. Katsanis, MS
In the summer of 2018, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officers removed over 2,600 migrant children from their families at the U.S.-Mexico border (Gonzalez, Republic, & Gomez 2018). The rationale behind the separations ranged from the criminal prosecution of illegally entering adults accompanying the children to uncertainty over the true relationships between the adults and children.…
Other Featured Blog Articles
What These Medical Journals Don’t Reveal: Top Doctors’ Ties to Industry The New York Times
The Sarah Cannon Research Institute, based in Nashville, received nearly $8 million in payments from drug companies on behalf of its president for clinical operations, Dr. Howard Burris, largely for research work. Dozens of his articles published in prestigious medical journals did not include the required disclosures of those payments and relationships.
The CRISPR Baby Scandal Gets Worse by the Day The Atlantic
Before last week, few people had heard the name He Jiankui. But on November 25, the young Chinese researcher became the center of a global firestorm when it emerged that he had allegedly made the first crispr-edited babies, twin girls named Lulu and Nana. Antonio Regalado broke the story for MIT Technology Review, and He himself described the experiment at an international gene-editing summit in Hong Kong. After his talk, He revealed that another early pregnancy is under way.
It is still unclear if He did what he claims to have done. Nonetheless, the reaction was swift and negative. The crispr pioneer Jennifer Doudna says she was “horrified,” NIH Director Francis Collins said the experiment was “profoundly disturbing,” and even Julian Savulescu, an ethicist who has described gene-editing research as “a moral necessity,” described He’s work as “monstrous.”
Why Are Scientists So Upset About the First Crispr Babies? The New York Times
A Chinese scientist recently claimed he had produced the world’s first gene-edited babies, setting off a global firestorm. If true — the scientist has not yet published data that would confirm it — his actions would be a sensational breach of international scientific conventions. Although gene editing holds promise to potentially correct dangerous disease-causing mutations and treat some medical conditions, there are many safety and ethical concerns about editing human embryos.
Here are answers to some of the numerous questions swirling around this development.
Microsoft Corp. called for new legislation to govern artificial intelligence software for recognizing faces, advocating for human review and oversight of the technology in crucial cases.
“This includes where decisions may create a risk of bodily or emotional harm to a consumer, where there may be implications on human or fundamental rights, or where a consumer’s personal freedom or privacy may be impinged,” Microsoft’s president and chief legal officer, Brad Smith, wrote in a blog post published Thursday in conjunction with a speech on the topic at the Brookings Institution think tank.
- Animal Ethics
- Clinical Ethics
- Clinical Trials & Studies
- Conflict of Interest
- Decision making
- End of Life Care
- Environmental Ethics
- Global Ethics
- Health Care
- Health Disparities
- Health Policy & Insurance
- Health Regulation & Law
- Human Subjects Research & IRBs
- In Memoriam
- Informed Consent
- Institutions, Centers, Funding
- Medical Humanities
- Organ Transplant & Donation
- Philosophy & Ethics
- professional ethics
- Psychiatric Ethics
- Public Health
- Reproductive Ethics
- Research Ethics
- Social Justice
- Sports Ethics
- Stem Cells