Ethical Justifiability Research Articles

Consciously Choosing Unconsciousness

Consciously Choosing Unconsciousness

DR.BEAT: Initial Functional Testing of a BCG Wearable Prototype for Recording Ballistocardiographic Signals.

DR.BEAT ("Digital Research on Ballistocardiography for Extraterrestrial And Terrestrial use") develops a miniaturized sensor system with signal processing to interpret ballistocardiographic signals and implements an application oriented user interface. Presented is a breadboard prototype's functional tests with regard to data completeness and plausibility. The analysis confirmed a reliability of 99.99995% over the tests and the signals displayed the expected heart-specific characteristics. These results support the ethical justifiability of an initial study.

Burdens of History, Ethics of Engagement: German Film and the Afghan War

Based on the analysis of two contemporary German films on the war in Afghanistan – Auslandseinsatz (Till Endemann, 2012) and Zwischen Welten (Feo Aladag, 2014) – through the philosophical lens of the ‘just war theory’, this article discusses how the classic genre of the ‘boots on the ground’ war film is used to reflect on the ethical justifiability of military force in the context of Germany’s strategic culture at the beginning of the twenty-first century. The article argues that these two films are paradigmatic examples of a new and specifically German subgenre of the war film I suggest calling the ‘humanitarian military film’ that has its roots in the particular historical constellation that led to the development of the country’s current military culture.

Blacklisting Health Insurance Premium Defaulters: Is Denial of Medical Care Ethically Justifiable?

Rising health insurance costs and the cost of living crisis are likely leading to an increase in unpaid health insurance bills in many countries. In Switzerland, a particularly drastic measure to sanction defaulting insurance payers is employed. Since 2012, Swiss cantons – who have to cover most of the bills of defaulting payers - are allowed by federal law to blacklist them and to restrict their access to medical care to emergencies.In our paper, we briefly describe blacklisting in the context of the Swiss healthcare system before we examine the ethical issues involved in light of what is known about its social and health impacts. We found no evidence that blacklisting serves as an effective way of recovering unpaid health insurance contributions or of strengthening solidarity within the health insurance system. Furthermore, the ambiguous definitions of what constitutes an emergency treatment and the incompatibility of the denial of medical care with the obligation to provide professional assistance complicate the implementation of blacklists and expose care providers to enormous pressure.Therefore, we conclude that blacklists and the (partial) denial of medical care not only pose profound ethical problems but are also unsuitable for fulfilling the purpose for which they were introduced.

Solidarity and the ethics of exposing others to risk in medical research.

The ethical justifiability of the invitation of others to participate in research and their deliberate exposure to risks of harm is not a common topic in bioethics. If, however, some offers ought not to be made and the corresponding actions ought not to be facilitated, invitations to, and the conduct of, a medical study involving humans needs justification. This paper addresses this issue by linking the search for medical knowledge with solidarity. The argument begins with the observation that scientific research is aimed at general knowledge, which is a necessary condition of the social value of research. The applicability of this knowledge to many makes it potentially a public good; that is, a good that is available freely to all. For knowledge to be a public good, a social decision to make it freely available to all needs to be made. It is proposed that this decision be grounded in society's, and so in both researchers' and potential research participants', commitment to solidarity and its obligations of provision, sharing, support, and loyalty. These obligations imply, among other things, an imperfect obligation to participate in research and the corresponding entitlement of the investigators to invite others to participate in research, and so to expose them to its risks during implementation. This entitlement is exercised in an environment shaped by the standards and protections of research ethics and the relevant institutional arrangements.

The "WWHow" Concept for Prospective Categorization of Post-operative Severity Assessment in Mice and Rats.

The prospective severity assessment in animal experiments in the categories' non-recovery, mild, moderate, and severe is part of each approval process and serves to estimate the harm/benefit. Harms are essential for evaluating ethical justifiability, and on the other hand, they may represent confounders and effect modifiers within an experiment. Catalogs and guidelines provide a way to assess the experimental severity prospectively but are limited in adaptation due to their nature of representing particular examples without clear explanations of the assessment strategies. To provide more flexibility for current and future practices, we developed the modular Where-What-How (WWHow) concept, which applies findings from pre-clinical studies using surgical-induced pain models in mice and rats to provide a prospective severity assessment. The WWHow concept integrates intra-operative characteristics for predicting the maximum expected severity of surgical procedures. The assessed severity categorization is mainly congruent with examples in established catalogs; however, because the WWHow concept is based on anatomical location, detailed analysis of the tissue trauma and other intra-operative characteristics, it enables refinement actions, provides the basis for a fact-based dialogue with authority officials and other stakeholders, and helps to identify confounder factors of study findings.

The Ethics of Human Challenge Trials Using Emerging Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 2 Variants.

The world's first coronavirus disease 2019 human challenge trial using the D614G strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is underway in the United Kingdom. The Wellcome Trust is funding challenge stock preparation of the Beta and Delta variant for a follow-up human challenge trial, and researchers at hVIVO are considering conducting these trials. However, little has been written thus far about the ethical justifiability of human challenge trials with SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. We explore 2 specific characteristics of some variants that may initially be thought to make such trials unethical and conclude that SARS-CoV-2 variant challenge trials can remain ethical.

Should clinicians make chest surgery available to transgender male adolescents?

Bioethicists are increasingly engaged in considering the ethical issues associated with the care of transgender people. One such issue facing paediatric clinicians is requests for chest surgery from transgender male adolescents. For transgender young people who identify as male but have already progressed through the mid to late stages of puberty, hormone treatment will not reverse breast development. Some of these young people are distressed by their chest, and request surgery to remove this tissue. Demand for this surgery during adolescence is increasing. However, few paediatric hospitals make this intervention available to adolescents. This paper focuses on the following ethical question: Should clinicians make chest surgery available to transgender male adolescents? We argue that making chest surgery available to transgender male adolescents under some circumstances is ethically justifiable for three reasons, based on the concepts of beneficence, privacy, and non-discrimination. Firstly, the limited evidence to date suggests that chest surgery is beneficial to transgender male adolescents who seek this intervention. Secondly, chest surgery protects transgender adolescents' privacy by enabling them to better control disclosure of their transgender identity. Thirdly, chest surgery is already performed on other adolescent males for psychosocial reasons, such as in the case of gynaecomastia; non-discrimination thus provides a further reason for making chest surgery available to transgender male adolescents whose male gender identity is consistent. We suggest that the ethical justifiability of chest surgery in any specific transgender adolescent's case will depend on the individual patient's circumstances.

Determination of the LD50 with the chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay as a promising alternative in nanotoxicological evaluation

Toxicity tests in rodents are still considered a controversial topic concerning their ethical justifiability. The chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay may offer a simple and inexpensive alternative. The CAM assay is easy to perform and has low bureaucratic hurdles. At the same time, the CAM assay allows the application of a broad variety of analytical methods in the field of nanotoxicological research. We evaluated the CAM assay as a methodology for the determination of nanotoxicity. Therefore we calculated the median lethal dose (LD50), performed in vivo microscopy and immunohistochemistry to identify organ-specific accumulation profiles, potential organ damage, and the kinetics of the in vivo circulation of the nanoparticles. Zinc oxide nanoparticles were intravascularly injected on day 10 of the egg development and showed an LD50 of 17.5 µM (1.4 µg/mLeggcontent). In comparison, the LD50 of equivalent amounts of Zn2+ was 4.6 µM (0.6 µg/mLeggcontent). Silica encapsulated ZnO@SiO2 nanoparticles conjugated with fluorescein circulated in the bloodstream for at least 24 h. Particles accumulated mostly in the liver and kidney. In immunohistochemical staining, organ damage was detected only in liver tissue after intravascular injection of zinc oxide nanoparticles in very high concentrations. Zinc oxide nanoparticles showed a different pharmacokinetic profile compared to Zn2+ ions. In conclusion, the CAM assay has proven to be a promising methodology for evaluating nanotoxicity and for the assessment of the in vivo accumulation profiles of nanoparticles. These findings may qualify the methodology for risk assessment of innovative nanotherapeutics in the future.

Negative und positive Pflichten. Über eine wichtige Unterscheidung für eine ethische Politik gegen Pandemien

The legal and ethical justifiability of the measures taken to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 has so far been discussed under the aspects of balancing goods and proportionality. The important distinction between negative and positive moral duties is hardly taken into account. This leads to the fact that in order to protect life and health, even such measures seem permissible that do not only insignificantly violate the goods to be protected. This makes little sense in itself, but is unacceptable from a moral philosophical point of view, as long as one adheres to the postulate of human dignity.

It Didn\u2019t Have to be This Way Reflections on the Ethical Justification of the Running Ban in Northern Italy in Response to the 2020 COVID-19 Outbreak

In this paper I discuss the ethical justifiability of the limitation of freedom of movement, in particular of the ban on running outdoors, enforced in Italy as a response to the COVID-19 outbreak in the spring of 2020. I argue that through the lens of public health ethics literature, the ban on running falls short of the criterion of proportionality that public health ethics scholars and international guidelines for the ethical management of infectious disease outbreak recommend for any measure that restricts essential individual freedoms, such as the freedom of movement. The public health ethics framework, however, falls short of explaining the widespread public support that the running ban has had in Italy. I discuss possible factors which could explain the public support for the ban in Italy. Finally, I raise the question of what societal implications the abandonment of the public health ethics framework based on proportionality might have. I conclude that if it is the case, as the history of pandemics teaches us, we will experience further waves of COVID-19 outbreaks, it becomes very important to raise these questions now, with an eye towards informing public health policies for the management of future COVID-19 outbreaks. This discussion should not become politicized along the lines of liberal pro-lockdown/conservative anti-lockdown. Instead, we should reflect on the trade-offs of lockdown policies according to a pluralist framework, in which COVID-19 related deaths are not the only possible value to pursue.

On visions and promises - ethical aspects of in vitro meat.

Innovators of in vitro meat (IVM) are convinced that this approach is the solution for problems related to current meat production and consumption, especially regarding animal welfare and environmental issues. However, the production conditions have yet to be fully clarified and there is still a lack of ethical discourses and critical debates on IVM. In consequence, discussion about the ethical justifiability and desirability of IVM remains hypothetical and we have to question those promises. This paper addresses the complex ethical aspects associated with IVM and the questions of whether, and under what conditions, the production of IVM represents an ethically justifiable solution for existing problems, especially in view of animal welfare, the environment, and society. There are particular hopes regarding the benefits that IVM could bring to animal welfare and the environment, but there are also strong doubts about their ethical benefits.

Risk, Overdiagnosis and Ethical Justifications

Many healthcare practices expose people to risks of harmful outcomes. However, the major theories of moral philosophy struggle to assess whether, when and why it is ethically justifiable to expose individuals to risks, as opposed to actually harming them. Sven Ove Hansson has proposed an approach to the ethical assessment of risk imposition that encourages attention to factors including questions of justice in the distribution of advantage and risk, people’s acceptance or otherwise of risks, and the scope individuals have to influence the practices that generate risk. This paper investigates the ethical justifiability of preventive healthcare practices that expose people to risks including overdiagnosis. We applied Hansson’s framework to three such practices: an ‘ideal’ breast screening service, a commercial personal genome testing service, and a guideline that lowers the diagnostic threshold for hypertension. The framework was challenging to apply, not least because healthcare has unclear boundaries and involves highly complex practices. Nonetheless, the framework encouraged attention to issues that would be widely recognised as morally pertinent. Our assessment supports the view that at least some preventive healthcare practices that impose risks including that of overdiagnosis are not ethically justifiable. Further work is however needed to develop and/or test refined assessment criteria and guidance for applying them.

‘Operating is the easy part’: Surgeons’ decision-making processes and responses to parental requests for elective paediatric appearance-altering facial surgery

Some parents request elective appearance-altering facial surgery for their children for cosmetic, psychological and/or social reasons. These operations have attracted controversy in the bioethics literature. They are also the subject of professional guidance documents internationally, which leave much to individual practitioners' discretion. Despite their controversial nature, very little is known about surgeons' practices and decision-making processes regarding these operations. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted by 22 plastic surgeons and oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Australia to explore their descriptions of the types of parental requests they receive for these operations, their decision-making processes and their responses to these requests. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using inductive content analysis. Surgeons reported parents often request these operations to alleviate or prevent teasing and associated psychosocial distress. However, surgeons expressed concern some parents may be requesting surgery to further their own interests, rather than their child's. Surgeons reported considering multiple factors when making decisions about the ethical justifiability of facilitating these parental requests, including children's wishes about surgery, the severity of the facial difference, the child's growth stage and parents' reasons for requesting. Although most surgeons appeared comfortable denying parental requests when they believe surgery is not in the child's best interests, some indicated they will acquiesce if parents persist. This study provides insights into surgeons' practices and decision-making processes regarding elective paediatric appearance-altering facial surgery requested by parents. It also highlights implications for clinical practice and education, and identifies areas warranting further research.

Moral enhancement through neurosurgery? Feasibility and ethical justifiability

Moral Enhancement wird von einer Reihe einflussreicher Bioethiker propagiert, zum Teil mit dem Anspruch, dass nur dadurch die Menschheit vor ihrem selbstverschuldeten Untergang zu retten sei. Nachdem begrundete Zweifel an der Eignung der zum Moral Enhancement vorgeschlagenen Psychopharmaka aufgekommen sind, wurden neurochirurgische Interventionen, insbesondere die Tiefe Hirnstimulation, vorgeschlagen. Diese Ad-hoc-Vorschlage stutzen sich auf eine Handvoll neurochirurgischer Eingriffe an geistig schwer behinderten Menschen sowie die Psychochirurgie des letzten Jahrhunderts. In diesem Aufsatz geht es erstens um die Frage, ob Moral Enhancement durch neurochirurgische Methoden uberhaupt moglich ist und, wenn ja, inwiefern, und zweitens um die Frage nach dessen ethischer Vertretbarkeit, sofern es moglich ist. Mit den bisher vorgeschlagenen Methoden des neurochirurgischen Moral Enhancement konnte man zwar Aggressionen oder den Sexualtrieb reduzieren, sodass weniger Selbstkontrolle erforderlich ware, um moralisch angemessen zu handeln. Theoretisch denkbar, aber bisher nicht durch empirische Evidenz gestutzt, ist, dass neurochirurgische Eingriffe die Selbstkontrolle verbessern konnten. Nach dem Modell der moralischen Intelligenz von Carmen Tanner und Markus Christen lasst sich zeigen, dass dadurch allenfalls eine Komponente der moralischen Intelligenz verbessert werden konnte, namlich die moralische Standhaftigkeit. Keiner der bisherigen Vorschlage zielt dagegen auf die Verbesserung der anderen vier Komponenten, also des moralischen Kompasses, der moralischen Sensibilitat, der moralischen Urteilsfahigkeit und der moralischen Motivation. Ein umfassendes Moral Enhancement durch neurochirurgische Eingriffe ist mit den gegenwartig verfugbaren oder vorgeschlagenen Methoden also nicht moglich. Allenfalls lasst sich in Zukunft durch Closed-Loop-Systeme, die bestimmte Impulse automatisch herunter regeln, ein moralkonformeres Verhalten erreichen. Eine nur technisch induzierte Verhaltensverbesserung ware allerdings hochstens unter Zugrundelegung eines utilitaristischen Moralverstandnisses als moralische Verbesserung anzuerkennen.

Is Editing the Genome for Climate Change Adaptation Ethically Justifiable?

As climate change progresses, we humans might have to inhabit a world for which we are increasingly maladapted. If we were able to identify genes that directly influence our ability to thrive in a changing climate, would it be ethically justifiable to edit the human genome to enhance our ability to adapt to this new environment? Should we use gene editing not only to prevent significant disease but also to enhance our ability to function in the world? Here I suggest a "4-S framework" for analyzing the justifiability of gene editing that includes these considerations: (1) safety, (2) significance of harm to be averted, (3) succeeding generations, and (4) social consequences.

Public Reasoning and Health-Care Priority Setting: The Case of NICE.

Health systems that aim to secure universal patient access through a scheme of prepayments-whether through taxes, social insurance, or a combination of the two-need to make decisions on the scope of coverage that they guarantee: such tasks often falling to a priority-setting agency. This article analyzes the decision-making processes at one such agency in particular-the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)-and appraises their ethical justifiability. In particular, we consider the extent to which NICE's model can be justified on the basis of Rawls's conception of "reasonableness." This test shares certain features with the well-known Accountability for Reasonableness (AfR) model but also offers an alternative to it, being concerned with how far the values used by priority-setting agencies such as NICE meet substantive conditions of reasonableness irrespective of their procedural virtues. We find that while there are areas in which NICE's processes may be improved, NICE's overall approach to evaluating health technologies and setting priorities for health-care coverage is a reasonable one, making it an exemplar for other health-care systems facing similar coverage dilemmas. In so doing we offer both a framework for analysing the ethical justifiability of NICE's processes and one that might be used to evaluate others.

Body Dysmorphic Disorder: Contraindication or Ethical Justification for Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery in Adolescents.

Is Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery for an adolescent with Body Dysmorphic Disorder ever ethically justified? Cosmetic genital surgery (specifically labioplasty) for adolescent girls is one of the most ethically controversial forms of cosmetic surgery and Body Dysmorphic Disorder is typically seen as a contraindication for cosmetic surgery. Two key ethical concerns are (1) that Body Dysmorphic Disorder undermines whatever capacity for autonomy the adolescent has; and (2) even if there is valid parental consent, the presence of Body Dysmorphic Disorder means that cosmetic surgery will fail in its aims. In this article, we challenge, in an evidence-based way, the standard view that Body Dysmorphic Disorder is a contraindication for genital cosmetic surgery in adolescents. Our argument gathers together and unifies a substantial amount of disparate research in the context of an ethical argument. We focus on empirical questions about benefit and harm, because these are ethically significant. Answers to these questions affect the answer to the ethical question. We question the claim that there would be no benefit from surgery in this situation, and we consider possible harms that might be done if treatment is refused. For an adolescent with Body Dysmorphic Disorder, the most important thing may be to avoid harm. We find ourselves arguing for the ethical justifiability of cosmetic labioplasty for an adolescent with Body Dysmorphic Disorder, even though we recognize that it is a counter intuitive position. We explain how we reached our conclusion.

Anorexia Nervosa: The Diagnosis

This paper argues that there is a relationship between understandings of anorexia nervosa (AN) and how the ethical issues associated with involuntary treatment for AN are identified, framed, and addressed. By positioning AN as a construct/discourse (hereinafter "AN: the diagnosis") several ethical issues are revealed. Firstly, "AN: the diagnosis" influences how the autonomy and competence of persons diagnosed with AN are understood by decision-makers in the treatment environment. Secondly, "AN: the diagnosis" impacts on how treatment and treatment efficacy are defined and the ethical justifiability of paternalism. Thirdly, "AN: the diagnosis" can limit the opportunity for persons with AN to construct an identity that casts them as a competent person. "AN: the diagnosis" can thus inherently affirm professional knowledge and values. Postmodern professional ethics can support professionals in managing these issues by highlighting the importance of taking responsibility for professional knowledge, values, and power and embracing moral uncertainty.

Manipulation of information in medical research: Can it be morally justified?

The aim of this article is to examine whether informational manipulation, used intentionally by the researcher to increase recruitment in the research study, can be morally acceptable. We argue that this question is better answered by following a non-normative account, according to which the ethical justifiability of informational manipulation should not be relevant to its definition. The most appropriate criterion by which informational manipulation should be considered as morally acceptable or not is the researcher’s special moral duties towards their subjects. We also propose that a broader definition of manipulation of information should be adopted (than that already existing in the literature) since informational manipulation can affect not only a person’s beliefs but also their desires in decision-making. We conclude that manipulation of information can either be used to protect the potential subject and facilitate the informed consent process or be used to exploit and merely use a person for scientific goals.