The fertility of moral ambiguity in precision medicine.

IF 2.3 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Medicine Health Care and Philosophy Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1007/s11019-023-10160-0
Jeanette Bresson Ladegaard Knox, Mette Nordahl Svendsen
{"title":"The fertility of moral ambiguity in precision medicine.","authors":"Jeanette Bresson Ladegaard Knox,&nbsp;Mette Nordahl Svendsen","doi":"10.1007/s11019-023-10160-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although precision medicine cuts across a large spectrum of professions, interdisciplinary and cross-sectorial moral deliberation has yet to be widely enacted, let alone formalized in this field. In a recent research project on precision medicine, we designed a dialogical forum (i.e. 'the Ethics Laboratory') giving interdisciplinary and cross-sectorial stakeholders an opportunity to discuss their moral conundrums in concert. We organized and carried out four Ethics Laboratories. In this article, we use Simone de Beauvoir's concept of moral ambiguity as a lens to frame the participants' experience with fluid moral boundaries. By framing our approach through this concept we are able to elucidate irremediable moral issues that are collectively underexplored in the practice of precision medicine. Moral ambiguity accentuates an open and free space where different types of perspectives converge and can inform each other. Based on our study, we identified two dilemmas, or thematic interfaces, in the interdisciplinary moral deliberations which unfolded in the Ethics Laboratories: (1) the dilemma between the individual and the collective good; and (2) the dilemma between care and choice. Through our investigation of these dilemmas, we show how Beauvoir's concept of moral ambiquity not only serves as a fertile catalyst for greater moral awareness but, furthermore, how the concept can become an indispensable part of the practices of and the discourse about precision medicine.</p>","PeriodicalId":47449,"journal":{"name":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","volume":"26 3","pages":"465-476"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10243698/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-023-10160-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although precision medicine cuts across a large spectrum of professions, interdisciplinary and cross-sectorial moral deliberation has yet to be widely enacted, let alone formalized in this field. In a recent research project on precision medicine, we designed a dialogical forum (i.e. 'the Ethics Laboratory') giving interdisciplinary and cross-sectorial stakeholders an opportunity to discuss their moral conundrums in concert. We organized and carried out four Ethics Laboratories. In this article, we use Simone de Beauvoir's concept of moral ambiguity as a lens to frame the participants' experience with fluid moral boundaries. By framing our approach through this concept we are able to elucidate irremediable moral issues that are collectively underexplored in the practice of precision medicine. Moral ambiguity accentuates an open and free space where different types of perspectives converge and can inform each other. Based on our study, we identified two dilemmas, or thematic interfaces, in the interdisciplinary moral deliberations which unfolded in the Ethics Laboratories: (1) the dilemma between the individual and the collective good; and (2) the dilemma between care and choice. Through our investigation of these dilemmas, we show how Beauvoir's concept of moral ambiquity not only serves as a fertile catalyst for greater moral awareness but, furthermore, how the concept can become an indispensable part of the practices of and the discourse about precision medicine.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
精准医疗中道德歧义的泛滥。
尽管精准医学涉及众多专业,但跨学科和跨部门的道德审议尚未广泛实施,更不用说在该领域正式确立了。在最近的一个关于精准医疗的研究项目中,我们设计了一个对话论坛(即:“伦理实验室”),让跨学科和跨部门的利益相关者有机会共同讨论他们的道德难题。组织开展4个伦理实验室。在这篇文章中,我们使用西蒙娜·德·波伏娃的道德模糊概念作为镜头,用流动的道德界限来构建参与者的体验。通过这个概念构建我们的方法,我们能够阐明在精准医学实践中集体未被充分探索的不可补救的道德问题。道德模糊强调了一个开放和自由的空间,不同类型的观点汇聚在一起,可以相互告知。基于我们的研究,我们确定了在伦理实验室展开的跨学科道德讨论中的两个困境或主题界面:(1)个人利益与集体利益之间的困境;(2)关心与选择的两难。通过我们对这些困境的调查,我们展示了波伏娃关于道德模糊的概念如何不仅成为提高道德意识的肥沃催化剂,而且,这个概念如何成为精准医学实践和话语中不可或缺的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy: A European Journal is the official journal of the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Health Care. It provides a forum for international exchange of research data, theories, reports and opinions in bioethics and philosophy of medicine. The journal promotes interdisciplinary studies, and stimulates philosophical analysis centered on a common object of reflection: health care, the human effort to deal with disease, illness, death as well as health, well-being and life. Particular attention is paid to developing contributions from all European countries, and to making accessible scientific work and reports on the practice of health care ethics, from all nations, cultures and language areas in Europe.
期刊最新文献
To cure or not to cure. Non-empirical methods for ethics research on digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health: a systematic journal review. One R or the other - an experimental bioethics approach to 3R dilemmas in animal research. What is a cure through gene therapy? An analysis and evaluation of the use of "cure". Genetic enhancement from the perspective of transhumanism: exploring a new paradigm of transhuman evolution.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1