Ethical Principles, Process, and the Work of Bioethics Commissions

Hastings Center Report 47 (S1):50-53 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Shortly after the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues was constituted in 2010 and days before the commission members were to join a conference call to discuss possible topics for their deliberation, Craig Venter held a press conference announcing that his lab had created a synthetic chromosome for a species of mycoplasma and had inserted this genetic material into organisms of another species of mycoplasma (the genes of which had been deactivated), transforming the host species into the donor species. While not overtly claiming to have “created life in the test tube,” Venter's publicity seemed cleverly designed to provoke the media into reporting his discovery in just that way. The resulting uproar caused President Obama to give his new bioethics commission the assignment of investigating the ethics of the emerging field of synthetic biology. The commission went right to work. It formed working groups to deliberate about parts of the report, feeding ideas and language to the staff members who would do the actual writing, and then present the working group suggestions to the commission as a whole for public deliberation at open meetings. One of those working groups was charged with coming up with ethical principles that would guide the analysis. Having served as a member of that working group, I report here on the process by which these principles emerged and reflect upon the suitability of that process for the work of public bioethics commissions.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,343

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-08-06

Downloads
38 (#622,493)

6 months
7 (#469,699)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Daniel Sulmasy
Georgetown University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Democracy and Disagreement.Amy Gutmann & Dennis Thompson - 1996 - Ethics 108 (3):607-610.
A Critique of Principlism.K. D. Clouser & B. Gert - 1990 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 15 (2):219-236.
Specifying norms as a way to resolve concrete ethical problems.Henry S. Richardson - 1990 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 19 (4):279-310.
Methods and principles in biomedical ethics.T. L. Beauchamp - 2003 - Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (5):269-274.
Specifying, balancing, and interpreting bioethical principles.Henry S. Richardson - 2000 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):285 – 307.

Add more references