Monash Bioethics Review最新文献

Humans living off-world will face numerous physical, psychological and social challenges and are likely to suffer negative health effects due to their lack of evolutionary adaptation to space environments. While some of the necessary adaptations may develop naturally over many generations, genetic technologies could be used to speed this process along, potentially improving the wellbeing of early space settlers and their offspring. With broad support, such a program could lead to significant genetic modification of off-world communities, for example, to limit radiation damage on body systems or prevent bone and muscle loss in reduced gravity conditions. Given the extreme stressors of living off-world, and the need to have a healthy workforce to support a fledgling human settlement, those in favour of using genetic technologies to enhance settlers might even claim there is a moral imperative to protect their health in the face of the unique threats of space travel, especially for children born in settlements who did not take on these risks voluntarily. For some, this might simply be an extension of procreative beneficence. However, ethical concerns arise regarding the risks of embracing a eugenicist agenda and the potential impacts on the rights of future settlers to refuse such genetic enhancements for themselves or their children.

This article examines the assessment of mental capacity in the context of euthanasia, particularly when requested by patients with mental illnesses. It proposes a holistic alternative approach to the traditional functional model, arguing that the latter is insufficient to capture the complexity of these patients' decisions. Using approaches based on narrative, hermeneutic, and dialogical ethics, it offers an evaluation that considers the patient's life story, values, and context. Shared decision-making and empathy are identified as fundamental components to ensure informed and consensual decisions, promoting an environment of respect and mutual understanding. The article reviews Spanish legislation on euthanasia, highlighting the need to include medical ethics experts in the Guarantee and Evaluation Commissions. These experts provide a comprehensive ethical perspective essential for addressing the ethical complexities in euthanasia requests and ensuring fair decisions that reflect the patient's true will. It recommends reviewing and expanding current protocols, as well as including continuous ethics training to improve medical practice in this context. The conclusions suggest that an assessment of mental capacity based on ethical principles and an integrated narrative can significantly improve medical practice and decision-making in euthanasia, especially for these patients. Furthermore, the inclusion of ethics experts in the commissions can provide a more humane and just perspective, ensuring that decisions respect the patient's dignity and autonomy.

There is currently a pronounced lack of uniformity in the values placed on a life or a QALY by different New Zealand government entities taking actions designed to save lives or QALYs. With some limited exceptions, equity suggests that all QALYs be equally valued, and therefore likewise for all lives with the same residual life expectancy and quality of life. Prima facie, this is attainable by adopting the best (and only credible) New Zealand estimate of the value of life (the NZTA's $12.5 m value of the life of a median age person in good health), and using that or its QALY equivalent as a cutoff figure to determine interventions throughout the public sector. This provides opportunities for large welfare gains, from curtailing existing interventions that currently use much larger cutoff values (such as earthquake strengthening regulations) and expanding interventions that currently use much smaller cutoff values (such as public health spending). However, the NZTA's figure is only applicable to small increases in lives saved, and must decline as the number of additional lives saved increases. This relationship should be estimated.

This study examines the declining fertility rates in East Asian Confucian societies, focusing on the unique childrearing practices and how future advancements in human enhancement and reprogenetic technologies may further accelerate the demographic decline. The focus is on the obsession with "child perfectionism" driven by the pursuit of academic credentialism and hypercompetitive social norms. This phenomenon has roots in the historical imperial examinations of China and has evolved into modern college entrance exams. Recent growth in knowledge-based and technology-driven economies in East Asia has further fueled this trend, leading to the widespread practice of "tiger parenting" whereby parents push their children into the competitive educational system at an early age, often paying high fees for private tuition. Such intense pressure discourages many families from having more children, with some couples choosing not to have any children at all. The development of cognitive-enhancing brain chips and reprogenetic technology platforms for consumer eugenics, such as germline genome editing and polygenic embryo screening, may further increase financial strain on parents, potentially accelerating demographic decline. The term "Confugenics" is thus proposed to describe the intersection of these new eugenics and enhancement technologies with the Confucian emphasis on academic success, which may worsen the demographic crisis.

Controlled Human Infection Studies (CHIS) involving the deliberate exposure of healthy individuals to infectious agents, are emerging as a valuable tool for medical research. This systematic survey explores the perceptions of ethics committee members from various Indian medical research institutions after participating in a sensitization workshop on CHIS. This cross-sectional study was conducted on the workshop participants through an online survey. The workshop was held in a hybrid mode and around 60 participants from four tertiary care institutions and research institutes had participated. A structured questionnaire was used to assess their evolving perspectives, challenges, and recommendations related to CHIS and the effectiveness of the workshop. Both Likert scale and open-ended items were included in the survey. Responses are presented as percentage and views supported through the quotes from responses. Around 43 participants responded to the survey (72%). Participants acknowledged the potential benefits of CHIS but were concerned about the psychological harm and other risks. Challenges were identified in conducting and reviewing CHIS, including regulatory approvals, risk assessment, and robust informed consent. The need for development of regulatory guidelines, specialized training, risk mitigation strategies, community engagement, and compensation mechanisms were highlighted. The sensitization workshop was considered valuable in enhancing participants' understanding of CHIS, although participants expressed a need for continued training and experience to effectively review such studies. With the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) releasing a policy statement on ethical conduct of CHIS in India, this study provides a foundation for future capacity-building initiatives among ethics committee members. The findings emphasize the significance of ongoing dialogue to standardize the ethical review process for CHIS, thus facilitating their acceptance and realization in India's medical research landscape.

Frail and elderly persons approaching end of life who suffer cardiac arrest are often subject to rigorous, undignified, and inappropriate resuscitation attempts despite poor outcomes. This scoping review aims to investigate how people feel about the appropriateness of CPR in this population. This review was guided by the PRISMA-ScR methodological framework. A search strategy was developed for four online databases (MEDLINE, EMCARE, PSYCHINFO, CINAHL). Two reviewers were utilised for title/abstract screening, full text review and data extraction. Full text, peer reviewed studies were eligible for inclusion which discussed perspectives in the frail and/or elderly population with a focus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The database search yielded 3693 references (MEDLINE n = 1417, EMCARE n = 1505, PSYCHINFO n = 13, CINAHL n = 758). Following removal of duplicates (n = 953), title and abstract screening was performed on 2740 papers. A total of 2634 articles did not meet the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies were included in the scoping review and analysed for data extraction. Five themes emerged: (i) Preferences towards CPR, (ii) Preferences against CPR, (iii) Poor knowledge of CPR/Estimated survival rates, (iv) Do Not Resuscitate Orders, and (v) Decisional authority. This scoping review maps and describes the common perspectives shared by CPR stakeholders in the frail/elderly population. Findings revealed CPR decisions are often made based on incorrect knowledge, DNAR orders are frequently underused, CPR decisional authority remains vague and healthcare professionals have mixed views on the appropriateness of CPR in this population.

In Australia, Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) play a ubiquitous role reviewing human subjects research, as do Institutional Review Boards in the US and elsewhere. While HRECs were established as peer review bodies, we argue they should now be characterised a 'devolved regulator' within the broader context of the regulatory state. We evidence HRECs' regulatory role through three examples of current responsibilities. By categorising HRECs as a regulator, we are able to assess their role through a regulatory lens. Drawing on Reeve and Magnusson's 'regulatory scaffolding' approach, we suggest key ways in which the role provided by HRECs could be improved. These include setting clear roles and responsibilities HREC review; ensuring HREC accountability for the substantive aspects of their decision making; and accountability for trial sponsors who seek review of trials under the Clinical Trials Notification Scheme. Deficits in the above must incur a credible expectation of escalation and review.

While the trade of human organs are illegal and widely condemned, a black market flourishes. Estimates indicate that 10% of kidney transplants from living donors involve illegal payments to the kidney seller. This paper presents a typology for approaches aimed at curtailing the black market in human organs. The policies are evaluated from two perspectives: their ethical permissibility and their expected efficiency in ending and minimizing the trade in human organs. To end or minimize organ trading, we must reduce the organ shortage in order to reduce demand for organs, alleviate poverty to reduce the supply of organs, and disincentivize brokers and medical facilitators through a concerted effort to reduce the profit rate of the international organ trade.

The year 2024 marked the 60th anniversary of the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki (DoH). Coincidentally, the WMA published the 8th revision of this landmark document guiding medical research involving human subjects. One of the key changes in this latest revision concerns the notion of vulnerability, which has always been central to the DoH's ethos. The term 'vulnerability' was explicitly introduced in the 5th revision, published in 2000, which lists five vulnerable groups. Subsequent revisions have significantly altered how vulnerability is portrayed and understood within the document. This article traces the conceptualisation of vulnerability across the various versions of the DoH, culminating in its recently published 8th revision. We explore the underlying principles of each revision and examine how these principles have both influenced and been influenced by broader ethical discourses. Lastly, we address some of the challenges that future revisions must meet to ensure that the document remains internally coherent and practically applicable for researchers and research ethics committees alike.

Medical humanities teaching in UK medical schools has lacked cohesion, having developed opportunistically in different locations. Cohesion is necessary to develop an identifiable community of practice, but within that community there can be multiple readings of what 'medical humanities' are and how they may develop. This article details discussions held by medical humanities scholars teaching in UK medical schools at a workshop in January 2025 at the University of Oxford covering five key areas: the role of humanities scholars in medical schools, patients as partners in medical education, core curriculum teaching, intercalated teaching, and assessment. Our discussion highlights opportunities and challenges facing humanities teaching in UK medical schools today and calls for the creation of a community of medical humanities scholars working in UK medical education embracing diversity of opinion and practices. The article is specifically written as a synopsis of a brainstorming symposium.