Blog RSS Blog.

Author Archive: Blog Editor


ASBH Lifetime Achievement Award 2017-Myra Christopher is proud to present this live release of the talks given by the 2017 ASBH Lifetime Achievement Award honorees. If you are at the ASBH Meeting, you can read along; if you were unable to attend, then you can see their talks here. Please join us in congratulating these luminaries who have contributed significantly to the field of bioethics.

ASBH Lifetime Achievement Award-2017
Bioethics and an Ethics of Solidarity
Myra Christopher
Kathleen M. Foley Chair Pain and Palliative Care, Center for Practical Bioethics
Director of PAINS (Pain Action Alliance to Implement a National Strategy)

Myra Christopher

When Amy Haddad told me that I would receive this award, I told her that I was honored and stunned. …

Full Article

This entry was posted in Ethics, Featured Posts, Health Care and tagged . Posted by Blog Editor. Bookmark the permalink.


Justice and Bioethics: Who Should Finance Academic Publishing?

by Udo Schuklenk (Joint Editor in Chief) & David Magnus (Editor in Chief)
We applaud Chattopadhyay, Muyser, Moxham & DeVries on their article, “A Question of Social Justice: How Policies of Profit Negate Engagement of Developing World Bioethicsts and Undermine Bioethicists” for tackling an important and often neglected topic in bioethics: the challenges that our under-resourced colleagues face in conducting research and contributing to the literature in bioethics. Indeed, one of us (U.S.) has spent a good deal of his career attempting to draw attention to this problem and ameliorate it.

Though we are sympathetic to the concerns raised in their article there are several issues that have not been adequately addressed.…

Full Article

This entry was posted in Editorial-AJOB, Featured Posts, Global Ethics, Justice, Research Ethics, Social Justice. Posted by Blog Editor. Bookmark the permalink.


The Rescinding of DACA: What Should Healthcare Professionals and Academics Do? (And Why?)

by Mark G. Kuczewski, Ph.D. Danish Zaidi, MTS, MBE

Imagine that the 14th Amendment is repealed. Suddenly, birthright citizenship is no longer the accepted law of the United States. African-Americans become largely seen as non-citizens because many of their ancestors’ mode of forced entry into the United States (i.e., via slave ship). As non-citizens without valid immigration papers, they can no longer be lawfully employed and are denied routine opportunities in most states such as being able to obtain a driver’s license. This population is excluded from all government “benefits:” They cannot obtain a federal student loan and they cannot purchase a health insurance policy on the exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act.…

Full Article


Response to the Common Rule Special Issue: Attention to Health Disparities

by Nicolle K. Strand, JD, MBioethics, and Nora Jones, PhD

The article and commentaries on recent revisions to the Common Rule published in the July 2017 issue of AJOB are missing, we believe, a key perspective. The target articles and open peer commentaries suggested strategies for revising or overhauling the Common Rule to best address subject protections in light of the new and unique features of our contemporary research landscape, including the move from prospective research to research using existing data and biospecimens, personalized medicine, the increase in international collaboration, and the uptick in data sharing across institutions. Suggestions included encouraging federal regulators to revisit the regulations more often and bringing more stakeholders to the regulatory conversations.…

Full Article


We Can and Must Rebuild the Bridges of Interdisciplinary Bioethics

by Darryl R. J. Macer

This editorial is made available on The editorial along with the target article and open peer commentary is available via

Although we can argue that bioethics is holistic and found in every culture, and still alive among people of many indigenous communities as well as the postmodern ones, the academic discipline of bioethics as interpreted by many scholars has attempted to burn bridges to both different views and to persons with different life trajectories and training. The bridges between different cultural and epistemological foundations of bioethics have also been strained by the dominance of Western paradigms of principlism and the emergence of an academic profession of medical bioethics.…

Full Article

This entry was posted in Environmental Ethics, Featured Posts and tagged , , , . Posted by Blog Editor. Bookmark the permalink.


What We Do When We Resuscitate Extremely Preterm Infants

by Jeremy R. Garrett, Brian S. Carter & John D. Lantos

This editorial is made available on The editorial along with the target article and open peer commentary is available via

Neonatal intensive care is one of the most successful medical innovations of the last half century. Every year, in the United States alone, nearly 500,000 babies are born prematurely. Before neonatal intensive care, most of those babies died, and those who survived often suffered significant life-limiting impairments. Today, most preemies survive without impairments.

In spite of this success, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) care has always been viewed as ethically problematic.…

Full Article

This entry was posted in Featured Posts, Pediatrics and tagged , , . Posted by Blog Editor. Bookmark the permalink.


When a doctor calls a patient a racial slur, who is hurt?

by Keisha Ray, Ph.D.

Last week Lexi Carter, a black woman from Tennessee had an experience that so many other black people have had, a racially charged visit with a doctor. When Carter walked into her doctor’s office, Dr. James Turner greeted her with “Hi Aunt Jemima.” During the visit, he proceeded to call her Aunt Jemima more than once. Carter’s encounter with Dr. Turner is problematic for many reasons: 1. The term “Aunt Jemima,” which is the name of a popular syrup and pancake mix whose packaging depicts the face of a black woman, has a long history of racism dating back to the late 1800s; 2.…

Full Article


Response to: “Rethinking the Belmont Report? Yes!”

by Phoebe Friesen, Lisa Kearns, Barbara Redman, and Arthur L. Caplan

Emily Caldes and Jennifer McCormick make several excellent points in their blog post “Rethinking the Belmont Report? Yes!” We appreciate the response to our target article, and generally agree with their comments.

The authors point to an important distinction between the territory covered by the definition of research and the territory covered by research oversight. They rightly observe that, while we tend to conflate the definition of research with where oversight belongs in our article, these two can and perhaps should come apart. As per Caldes and McCormick’s suggestion, we are open to the possibility of retaining the definitions of research and practice offered in the Belmont Report and improving the system of research oversight by other means, although by which other means is a question that remains to be answered.…

Full Article


In Memoriam: John A. Robertson

by David Magnus, Ph.D.

Sadly, the field of bioethics lost one of its best this week. John Robertson, a law professor at the University of Texas and a major figure in law and bioethics, passed away on July 5th. John was an important scholar whose work spanned major contributions to scholarship on end of life, organ transplantation, and genetics, but he is best known for his work on reproductive technology. John’s articulation and defense of the importance of procreative liberty, though both his articles and his important book, Children of Choice, stand as exemplars for scholarship within bioethics.…

Full Article

This entry was posted in Featured Posts and tagged , . Posted by Blog Editor. Bookmark the permalink.


Rethinking the Belmont Report?

Some bioethicists link the beginnings of our field to the Nazi Medical experiments and the Nuremberg Trial (Annas). Whether this is the beginning of bioethics is debatable, but without a doubt, research ethics has been a central topic in the field. In fact, the very first federal bioethics commission laid out the principles of research ethics in the Belmont Report. Later, the President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research recommended to the President and Congress that a uniform framework and set of regulations should govern human subjects research.  This effort reached fruition under The Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects or the “Common Rule” that was issued in 1991. 

Full Article