Cuadernos de Bioetica最新文献

This article examines the ethical challenges posed by NBIC emerging and converging technologies (na-notechnology, biotechnology, artificial intelligence and information technologies, and cognitive sciences) from the perspective of personalist bioethics. Their biomedical and social applications are described, high-lighting the main values at stake: dignity, life, autonomy, vulnerability, and justice. Finally, guidelines are proposed, inspired by the principles of personalist bioethics: defense of human life, therapeutic totality, responsible freedom, and justice, to ensure that technological development remains at the service of the person and the common good.

The regulation legal of euthanasia in Spain was preceded by an increase in media coverage. This study conducted quantitative and qualitative analyses of media coverage in the 12 most widely circulated Spanish media outlets between January 2019 and March 2021, immediately before the enactment of the law regulating euthanasia. In total, 281 news articles were examined. About 51.6% of the news articles supported euthanasia, 18.9% opposed it, and 29.5% were neutral. Qualitative analysis revealed a substantial distinction between pro- and anti-euthanasia groups. The semantic field of items in pro-euthanasia articles comprised "law," "death," "suffering," and "pain." In contrast, the semantic field of articles opposing euthanasia comprised "life," "death," "people/person," and "illness." The media predominantly favored euthanasia, albeit offering limited discussion of alternatives, such as palliative care. It is crucial to cultivate an ethical culture that empowers citizens to make end-of-life decisions based on clear-cut principles, rational reasoning, and diverse perspectives.

It is almost universal to express the preventive or harmful health effects of a behavior or a medication as a percentage of variation between the starting situation and the one that considers this added factor. This figure of relative variation, isolated, does not allow us to take into account the relevance of said change, which may be quantitatively small. In the dissemination of health sciences, and especially in the dialogue with the patient, the basis of all preventive or therapeutic advice, relying on or using only this relative figure is misleading. When talking to the patient, he or she must be able to take into account the expected benefits or the risks he or she runs, without percentage reference to another situation, that is, the absolute advantages or dangers, so that a well-founded joint decision can be made. In this dialogue, issues related to the patient's ″lifestyle″ must appear, with due precautionary measures: omission of this can only prevent possible benefits for the patient.

The narrative phenomenon in bioethics is remarkably broad, and although some have spoken of a turn or a narrative era, it is not very clear, due to this broadness, exactly what it entails. This contribution attempts to highlight how a narratively well focused care perspective is qualified to enhance the level of freedom (and not only autonomy) by which the patient makes his or her decisions. To this end, an idea of narrative consistent with this perspective will first be outlined (ep. II). Then we will examine how illness can arouse a deep encounter of the patient with himself/herself, opening the way to a quest narrative, enabling him/her to integrate this traumatic experience into a new meaning horizon (ep. III). Finally, it is emphasized that the empowerment of the patient's freedom, through a, so to speak, narrative care, prevents abandoning the patient to his own autonomy, while limiting the need to interfere in his decisions (ep. IV).

Pain and suffering are physical and psychological sensations that affect people throughout life. In those who witness the suffering of others, various types of emotions may arise, making them feel connected to those who are suffering with different intensity. It is important to examine which emotion brings them closer to the pain of others, because depending on which one is predominant the therapeutic and intersubjective relationship of accompaniment and help can be facilitated or interrupted. Here, we examine the different emotions that arise in the presence of suffering individuals: sorrow, pity, empathy, commiseration, compassion, and finally mercy and transcendence, and the differences among them based on interpersonal proximity.

From 12 to 18 years of age, students in Spain go from a compulsory stage (ESO) to an optional stage (hight school), where issues related to bioethics are addressed in different subjects. Our work analyzes current textbooks from prestigious Spanish publishers in the humanities subjects of "Education in Civic and Ethical Values", "Philosophy", and "Catholic Religion". The objective has been to analyze, following a rubric, the quality and quantity of ethical and bioethical content related to human dignity. Our research provides, as conclusions, first of all, the widespread absence of an anthropological foundation of human dignity, equated with legalized "human rights" and often with the value of other living beings; the uncritical acceptance of the 2030 agenda; the omission of moral judgments in bioethical dilemmas that arise at the beginning and end of human life. Finally, we also detect the dissemination of the an absolute biocentrism, as a way of overcoming anthropocentrism, without considering the option of a relative biocentrism that does not reduce the human being to simple biology.

In the present work, the possible influence of biology textbooks on the bioethics training of high school students in Spain has been investigated. The bioethical content of the third and fourth year of high school books of the Anaya, Santillana, Oxford and SM publishers has been reviewed, concluding that they do not guarantee the essential training in bioethics of students, nor do they allow the development of a critical spirit in the face of the enormous possibilities opened up by the advances in science. None of the books explain that biology provides objective knowledge about the beginning of life of each human being. No publisher clarifies the biological status of the embryo, thus closing the door to its recognition as a person and to reflection on the treatment it deserves, and all of them evade the concept of dignity. Only in the fourth year of high school is something about bioethics explained in two publishing houses: in the SM publishing house from a Bioethics of Principles that is not reasoned and in Anaya from a positivist and utilitarian perspective. It would be desirable to incorporate aspects of Bioethics in successive editions of Biology books in high school that would allow biology to be connected with other branches of knowledge, which favor a comprehensive development of students and prepare them for the great challenges presented by advances in biotechnology. The four editorials analysed address biotechnological issues of great bioethical significance such as the use of stem cells, cloning, artificial human reproduction and genetic editing. However, we conclude that the analysis is carried out at an aseptic level without resorting to ethical foundations and referring only to the legal limitations of these practices. Although the different texts offer topics for bioethical debate within the classroom, we highlight the absence of ethical training to be able to determine when the dignity of human life is violated.