ORCID Profile
0000-0003-1691-6403
Current Organisation
West Virginia University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Research Topics
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Top 5 Research Topics
ANZSRC Field of Research (FoR)
Applied Ethics | Bioethics (human and animal) | Philosophical Psychology (incl. Moral Psychology and Philosophy of Action) | Ethical Use of New Technology (e.g. Nanotechnology, Biotechnology) | Medical Ethics | History of Ideas | Law and Society | Sociology | Applied Sociology, Program Evaluation and Social Impact Assessment |
ANZSRC Socio-Economic Objective (SEO)
Bioethics | Expanding Knowledge in Philosophy and Religious Studies | Technological Ethics | Women's Health | Health not elsewhere classified | Health Inequalities
Related Links
Publications
After the Pandemic: New Responsibilities
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 17-05-2021
DOI: 10.1093/PHE/PHAB008
Abstract: Seasonal influenza kills many hundreds of thousands of people every year. We argue that the current pandemic has lessons we should learn concerning how we should respond to it. Our response to the COVID-19 not only provides us with tools for confronting influenza it also changes our sense of what is possible. The recognition of how dramatic policy responses to COVID-19 were and how widespread their general acceptance has been allowed us to imagine new and more sweeping responses to influenza. In fact, we not only can grasp how we can reduce its toll this new knowledge entails new responsibilities to do so. We outline a range of potential interventions to alter social norms and to change structures to reduce influenza transmission, and consider ethical objections to our proposals.
Storing paediatric genomic data for sequential interrogation across the lifespan
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 06-2023
Abstract: Genomic sequencing (GS) is increasingly used in paediatric medicine to aid in screening, research and treatment. Some health systems are trialling GS as a first-line test in newborn screening programmes. Questions about what to do with genomic data after it has been generated are becoming more pertinent. While other research has outlined the ethical reasons for storing deidentified genomic data to be used in research, the ethical case for storing data for future clinical use has not been explicated. In this paper, we examine the ethical case for storing genomic data with the intention of using it as a lifetime health resource. In this model, genomic data would be stored with the intention of reanalysis at certain points through one’s life. We argue this could benefit in iduals and create an important public resource. However, several ethical challenges must first be met to achieve these benefits. We explore issues related to privacy, consent, justice and equality. We conclude by arguing that health systems should be moving towards futures that allow for the sequential interrogation of genomic data throughout the lifespan.
Great minds think different: Preserving cognitive diversity in an age of gene editing
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 02-04-2019
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12585
Ethical issues associated with prenatal screening using non‐invasive prenatal testing for sex chromosome aneuploidy
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 27-08-2023
DOI: 10.1002/PD.6217
Abstract: Prenatal screening for sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs) is increasingly available through expanded non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT). NIPT for SCAs raises complex ethical issues for clinical providers, prospective parents and future children. This paper discusses the ethical issues that arise around NIPT for SCAs and current guidelines and protocols for management. The first section outlines current practice and the limitations of NIPT for SCAs. It then outlines key guidelines before discussing the ethical issues raised by this use of NIPT. We conclude that while screening for SCAs should be made available for people seeking to use NIPT, its implementation requires careful consideration of what, when and how information is provided to users.
Polygenic risk score for embryo selection—not ready for prime time
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 19-07-2022
Abstract: Numerous chronic diseases have a substantial hereditary component. Recent advances in human genetics have allowed the extent of this to be quantified via genome-wide association studies, producing polygenic risk scores (PRS), which can then be applied to in iduals to estimate their risk of developing a disease in question. This technology has recently been applied to embryo selection in the setting of IVF and preimplantation genetic testing, with limited data to support its utility. Furthermore, there are concerns that the inherent limitations of PRS makes it ill-suited for use as a screening test in this setting. There are also serious ethical and moral questions associated with this technology that are yet to be addressed. We conclude that further research and ethical reflection are required before embryo selection based on PRS is offered to patients outside of the research setting.
Germline gene editing and the precautionary principle
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 27-06-2020
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12609
Ethics of selective restriction of liberty in a pandemic
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 31-05-2021
DOI: 10.1136/MEDETHICS-2020-107104
Abstract: Liberty-restricting measures have been implemented for centuries to limit the spread of infectious diseases. This article considers if and when it may be ethically acceptable to impose selective liberty-restricting measures in order to reduce the negative impacts of a pandemic by preventing particularly vulnerable groups of the community from contracting the disease. We argue that the commonly accepted explanation—that liberty restrictions may be justified to prevent harm to others when this is the least restrictive option—fails to adequately accommodate the complexity of the issue or the difficult choices that must be made, as illustrated by the COVID-19 pandemic. We introduce a dualist consequentialist approach, weighing utility at both a population and in idual level, which may provide a better framework for considering the justification for liberty restrictions. While liberty-restricting measures may be justified on the basis of significant benefits to the population and small costs for overall utility to in iduals, the question of whether it is acceptable to discriminate should be considered separately. This is because the consequentialist approach does not adequately account for the value of equality. This value may be protected through the application of an additional proportionality test. An algorithm for making decisions is proposed. Ultimately whether selective liberty-restricting measures are imposed will depend on a range of factors, including how widespread infection is in the community, the level of risk and harm a society is willing to accept, and the efficacy and cost of other mitigation options.
Collective Reflective Equilibrium in Practice (CREP) and controversial novel technologies
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 04-05-2021
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12869
Abstract: In this paper, we investigate how data about public preferences may be used to inform policy around the use of controversial novel technologies, using public preferences about autonomous vehicles (AVs) as a case study. We first summarize the recent ‘Moral Machine’ study, which generated preference data from millions of people regarding how they think AVs should respond to emergency situations. We argue that while such preferences cannot be used to directly inform policy, they should not be disregarded. We defend an approach that we call ‘Collective Reflective Equilibrium in Practice’ (CREP). In CREP, data on public attitudes function as an input into a deliberative process that looks for coherence between attitudes, behaviours and competing ethical principles. We argue that in cases of reasonable moral disagreement, data on public attitudes should play a much greater role in shaping policies than in areas of ethical consensus. We apply CREP to some of the global preferences about AVs uncovered by the Moral Machines study. We intend this discussion both as a substantive contribution to the debate about the programming of ethical AVs, and as an illustration of how CREP works. We argue that CREP provides a principled way of using some public preferences as an input for policy, while justifiably disregarding others.
Are Generational Welfare Trades Always Unjust?
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 25-08-2020
Prospective Intention-Based Lifestyle Contracts: mHealth Technology and Responsibility in Healthcare
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 11-01-2021
DOI: 10.1007/S10728-020-00424-8
Abstract: As the rising costs of lifestyle-related diseases place increasing strain on public healthcare systems, the in idual’s role in disease may be proposed as a healthcare rationing criterion. Literature thus far has largely focused on retrospective responsibility in healthcare. The concept of prospective responsibility, in the form of a lifestyle contract, warrants further investigation. The responsibilisation in healthcare debate also needs to take into account innovative developments in mobile health technology, such as wearable biometric devices and mobile apps, which may change how we hold others accountable for their lifestyles. Little is known about public attitudes towards lifestyle contracts and the use of mobile health technology to hold people responsible in the context of healthcare. This paper has two components. Firstly, it details empirical findings from a survey of 81 members of the United Kingdom general public on public attitudes towards in idual responsibility and rationing healthcare, prospective and retrospective responsibility, and the acceptability of lifestyle contracts in the context of mobile health technology. Secondly, we draw on the empirical findings and propose a model of prospective intention-based lifestyle contracts, which is both more aligned with public intuitions and less ethically objectionable than more traditional, retrospective models of responsibility in healthcare.
Zika, contraception and the non‐identity problem
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-11-2017
DOI: 10.1111/DEWB.12176
Offering and Returning Secondary Findings in the Context of Exome Sequencing for Hearing Loss: Clinicians’ Views and Experiences
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 03-01-2023
From public preferences to ethical policy
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 26-08-2019
Fair go: pay research participants properly or not at all
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 24-11-2020
The Ethics of Human Brain Organoid Transplantation in Animals
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 10-2023
Making psychiatry moral again: the role of psychiatry in patient moral development
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 19-08-2022
Abstract: Psychiatric involvement in patient morality is controversial. If psychiatrists are tasked with shaping patient morality, the coercive potential of psychiatry is increased, treatment may be unfairly administered on the basis of patients’ moral beliefs rather than medical need, moral disputes could damage the therapeutic relationship and, in any case, we are often uncertain or conflicted about what is morally right. Yet, there is also a strong case for the view that psychiatry often works through improving patient morality and, therefore, should aim to do so. Our goal is to offer a practical and ethical path through this conflict. We argue that the default psychiatric approach to patient morality should be procedural, whereby patients are helped to express their own moral beliefs. Such a procedural approach avoids the brunt of objections to psychiatric involvement in patient morality. However, in a small subset of cases where patients’ moral beliefs are sufficiently distorted or underdeveloped, we claim that psychiatrists should move to a substantive approach and shape the content of those beliefs when they are relevant to psychiatric outcomes. The substantive approach is prone to the above objections but we argue it is nevertheless justified in this subset of cases.
Conscientious objection and compromising the patient: Response to Hughes
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 19-06-2018
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12459
Abstract: Hughes offers a consequentialist response to our rejection of accommodation of conscientious objection in medicine. We argue here that his compromise proposition has been tried in many jurisdictions and has failed to deliver unimpeded access to care for eligible patients. The compromise position, entailing an accommodation of conscientious objection provided there is unimpeded access, fails to grasp that the objectors are both determined not to provide services they object to as well as to subvert patient access to the objected to services. Unpredictable future developments in drug R&D and resulting treatment and prevention options in medicine make the compromise position unrealistic.
Disclosure and consent: ensuring the ethical provision of information regarding childbirth
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 12-06-2023
Abstract: Ethical medical care of pregnant women in Australia should include the real provision of information regarding the risks and benefits of vaginal birth. Routinely obtaining consent for the different ways in which childbirth is commonly intervened on and the assistance involved (such as midwife-led care or a planned caesarean section) and providing sufficient information for women to evaluate the harms and benefits of the care on offer, would not only enable the empowerment of women but would align with the current standard of care as established by Rogers v Whittaker.
Drawing the line on in vitro gametogenesis
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 15-10-2019
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12679
Forever young? The ethics of ongoing puberty suppression for non-binary adults
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 24-07-2020
DOI: 10.1136/MEDETHICS-2019-106012
Abstract: In this article, we analyse the novel case of Phoenix, a non-binary adult requesting ongoing puberty suppression (OPS) to permanently prevent the development of secondary sex characteristics, as a way of affirming their gender identity. We argue that (1) the aim of OPS is consistent with the proper goals of medicine to promote well-being, and therefore could ethically be offered to non-binary adults in principle (2) there are additional equity-based reasons to offer OPS to non-binary adults as a group and (3) the ethical defensibility of facilitating in idual requests for OPS from non-binary adults also depends on other relevant considerations, including the balance of potential benefits over harms for that specific patient, and whether the patient’s request is substantially autonomous. Although the broadly principlist ethical approach we take can be used to analyse other cases of non-binary adults requesting OPS apart from the case we evaluate, we highlight that the outcome will necessarily depend on the in idual’s context and values. However, such clinical provision of OPS should ideally be within the context of a properly designed research study with long-term follow-up and open publication of results.
Ethical Withdrawal of ECMO Support Over the Objections of Competent Patients
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 23-05-2023
Moving from ‘fully’ to ‘appropriately’ informed consent in genomics: The PROMICE framework
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 07-04-2022
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.13027
Abstract: Genomic sequencing technologies (GS) pose novel challenges not seen in older genetic technologies, making traditional standards for fully informed consent difficult or impossible to meet. This is due to factors including the complexity of the test and the broad range of results it may identify. Meaningful informed consent is even more challenging to secure in contexts involving significant time constraints and emotional distress, such as when rapid genomic testing (RGS) is performed in neonatal intensive care units. In this article, we propose that informed consent matters not for its own sake, but because obtaining it furthers a range of morally important goals, such as promoting autonomy, well‐being, and trust in medicine. These goals form the basis of a new framework [PROmoting Morally Important Consent Ends (PROMICE)] for assessing the ethical appropriateness of various informed consent models. We illustrate this framework with two ex les: (a) a tiered and layered consent model for obtaining consent for GS, and (b) consent for RGS in critically ill newborns. We conclude that appropriately —rather than fully —informed consent provides the correct standard for genomic medicine and research.
Drugs, genes and screens: The ethics of preventing and treating spinal muscular atrophy
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 26-11-2020
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12695
Identity, well-being and autonomy in ongoing puberty suppression for non-binary adults: a response to the commentaries
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 21-10-2020
Epistemic responsibility in the face of a pandemic
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 2020
DOI: 10.1093/JLB/LSAA033
Abstract: Should non-experts defer to epidemiologists with regard to the response to the coronavirus pandemic? We argue that deference is required with regard to settled science: non-experts (that is, people who may possess expertise of their own but whose expertise is not relevant to a particular question) ought to defer with regard to climate science and the efficacy of vaccines. However, we suggest that this deference is warranted because these questions have been appropriately probed many times by many different kinds of people. While non-experts should defer to epidemiologists with regard to matters within the sphere of epidemiology specifically, responding to the pandemic requires expertise from many fields. We best build a consensus worth deferring to by contributing our expertise now. Ethicists and philosophers are not epistemically arrogant if they question policy responses. Rather, they play a responsible role in building a reliable consensus.
Genomic intensive care: should we perform genome testing in critically ill newborns?: Table 1
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 14-09-2015
A conscious choice: Is it ethical to aim for unconsciousness at the end of life?
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 17-12-2020
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12838
Abstract: One of the most commonly referenced ethical principles when it comes to the management of dying patients is the doctrine of double effect (DDE). The DDE affirms that it is acceptable to cause side effects (e.g. respiratory depression) as a consequence of symptom‐focused treatment. Much discussion of the ethics of end of life care focuses on the question of whether actions (or omissions) would hasten (or cause) death, and whether that is permissible. However, there is a separate question about the permissibility of hastening or causing unconsciousness in dying patients. Some authors have argued that the DDE would not permit end of life care that directly aims to render the patient unconscious. The claim is that consciousness is an objective human good and therefore doctors should not intentionally (and permanently) suppress it. Three types of end of life care (EOLC) practices will be explored in this article. The first is symptom‐based management (e.g. analgesia) the second is proportional terminal sedation as a means of relieving suffering (also referred to as palliative sedation or continuous deep sedation) and finally, deliberate and rapid sedation to unconsciousness until death (a practice we call terminal anaesthesia in this paper). After examining the common arguments for the various types of symptom‐based management and sedation, we apply the DDE to the latter two types of EOLC practices. We argue that aiming at unconsciousness, contrary to some claims, can be morally good or at least morally neutral in some dying patients.
Subsidizing PGD: The Moral Case for Funding Genetic Selection
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 15-08-2019
Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for “Non-Medical” Traits: Ensuring Consistency in Ethical Decision-Making
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 30-11-2021
DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2021.1996659
Abstract: The scope of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) could expand in the future to include detailed analysis of the fetal genome. This will allow for the testing for virtually any trait with a genetic contribution, including "non-medical" traits. Here we discuss the potential use of NIPT for these traits. We outline a scenario which highlights possible inconsistencies with ethical decision-making. We then discuss the case against permitting these uses. The objections include practical problems increasing inequities increasing the burden of choice negative impacts on the child, family, and society and issues with implementation. We then outline the case for permitting the use of NIPT for these traits. These include arguments for reproductive liberty and autonomy questioning the labeling of traits as "non-medical" and the principle of procreative beneficence. This summary of the case for and against can serve as a basis for the development of a consistent and coherent ethical framework.
The importance of accurate representation of human brain organoid research
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-2023
Modelling futility in the setting of fertility treatment
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 17-03-2022
Abstract: When is a fertility treatment futile? This question has great practical importance, given the role futility plays in ethical, legal and clinical discussions. Here, we outline a novel method of determining futility for IVF treatments. Our approach is distinctive for considering the economic value attached to the intended aim of IVF treatments, i.e. the birth of a child, rather than just the effects on prospective parents and the health system in general. We draw on the commonly used metric, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), to attach a monetary value to new lives created through IVF. We then define futility as treatments in which the chance of achieving a live birth is so low that IVF is no longer a cost-effective intervention given the economic value of new births. This model indicates that IVF treatments in which the chance of a live birth are & .3% are futile. This suggests IVF becomes futile when women are aged between 47 and 49 years of age. This is notable older than ages currently considered as futile in an Australian context (∼45). In the UK, government subsidized treatment with the couple’s own gametes stops at the age of 42, while privately funded treatments are self-regulated by in idual providers. In most European countries and the USA, the ‘age of futility’ is likewise managed by clinical consensus.
Placebo comparator group selection and use in surgical trials: the ASPIRE project including expert workshop
Publisher: National Institute for Health and Care Research
Date: 09-2021
DOI: 10.3310/HTA25530
Abstract: The use of placebo comparisons for randomised trials assessing the efficacy of surgical interventions is increasingly being considered. However, a placebo control is a complex type of comparison group in the surgical setting and, although powerful, presents many challenges. To provide a summary of knowledge on placebo controls in surgical trials and to summarise any recommendations for designers, evaluators and funders of placebo-controlled surgical trials. To carry out a state-of-the-art workshop and produce a corresponding report involving key stakeholders throughout. A workshop to discuss and summarise the existing knowledge and to develop the new guidelines. To assess what a placebo control entails and to assess the understanding of this tool in the context of surgery is considered, along with when placebo controls in surgery are acceptable (and when they are desirable). We have considered ethics arguments and regulatory requirements, how a placebo control should be designed, how to identify and mitigate risk for participants in these trials, and how such trials should be carried out and interpreted. The use of placebo controls is justified in randomised controlled trials of surgical interventions provided that there is a strong scientific and ethics rationale. Surgical placebos might be most appropriate when there is poor evidence for the efficacy of the procedure and a justified concern that results of a trial would be associated with a high risk of bias, particularly because of the placebo effect. The use of placebo controls is justified in randomised controlled trials of surgical interventions provided that there is a strong scientific and ethics rationale. Feasibility work is recommended to optimise the design and implementation of randomised controlled trials. An outline for best practice was produced in the form of the Applying Surgical Placebo in Randomised Evaluations (ASPIRE) guidelines for those considering the use of a placebo control in a surgical randomised controlled trial. Although the workshop participants involved international members, the majority of participants were from the UK. Therefore, although every attempt was made to make the recommendations applicable to all health systems, the guidelines may, unconsciously, be particularly applicable to clinical practice in the UK NHS. Future work should evaluate the use of the ASPIRE guidelines in making decisions about the use of a placebo-controlled surgical trial. In addition, further work is required on the appropriate nomenclature to adopt in this space. Funded by the Medical Research Council UK and the National Institute for Health Research as part of the Medical Research Council–National Institute for Health Research Methodology Research programme.
Vaccination of individuals lacking decision-making capacity during a public health emergency
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 07-2022
DOI: 10.1093/JLB/LSAC030
Abstract: This paper explores the ethical challenges in deciding whether to vaccinate in iduals lacking the decision-making capacity needed to provide informed consent during a public health emergency like COVID-19. The best interests standard ordinarily governs such decisions, which under the law in jurisdictions like England, Wales and Singapore takes into account the in idual’s past wishes and present preferences. However, in a public health emergency, the interests of third parties become more salient: those whom the unvaccinated in idual might expose to infection have an interest in the in idual’s being vaccinated. While current mental capacity law has not been interpreted to take such public health considerations into account, we argue that such considerations are nevertheless ethically relevant, and can legitimately be weighed up alongside other considerations such as the preferences of the in idual and impacts on their health. This is most relevant for in iduals lacking decision-making capacity who have previously declined or presently resist vaccination. The public health impact of vaccination may in some instances be enough to outweigh preferences of the in idual and justify providing vaccination against their past or present wishes.
Australian public perspectives on genomic data governance: responsibility, regulation, and logistical considerations
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 10-05-2023
Ethics of genomic passports: Should the genetically resistant be exempted from lockdowns and quarantines?
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 25-06-2021
DOI: 10.1136/MEDETHICS-2021-107297
Abstract: Lockdowns and quarantines have been implemented widely in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This has been accompanied by a rise in interest in the ethics of ‘passport’ systems that allow low-risk in iduals greater freedoms during lockdowns and exemptions to quarantines. Immunity and vaccination passports have been suggested to facilitate the greater movement of those with acquired immunity and who have been vaccinated. Another group of in iduals who pose a low risk to others during pandemics are those with genetically mediated resistances to pathogens. In this paper, we introduce the concept of genomic passports, which so far have not been explored in the bioethics literature. Using COVID-19 as an illustrative ex le, we explore the ethical issues raised by genomic passports and highlight differences and similarities to immunity passports. We conclude that, although there remain significant practical and ethical challenges to the implementation of genomic passports, there will be ways to ethically use them in the future.
Conscientious commitment, professional obligations and abortion provision after the reversal ofRoe v Wade
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 08-02-2023
Abstract: We argue that, in certain circumstances, doctors might be professionally justified to provide abortions even in those jurisdictions where abortion is illegal. That it is at least professionally permissible does not mean that they have an all-things-considered ethical justification or obligation to provide illegal abortions or that professional obligations or professional permissibility trump legal obligations. It rather means that professional organisations should respect and indeed protect doctors’ positive claims of conscience to provide abortions if they plausibly track what is in the best medical interests of their patients. It is the responsibility of state authorities to enforce the law, but it is the responsibility of professional organisations to uphold the highest standards of medical ethics, even when they conflict with the law. Whatever the legal sanctions in place, healthcare professionals should not be sanctioned by the professional bodies for providing abortions according to professional standards, even if illegally. Indeed, professional organisation should lobby to offer protection to such professionals. Our arguments have practical implications for what healthcare professionals and healthcare professional organisations may or should do in those jurisdictions that legally prohibit abortion, such as some US States after the reversal of Roe v Wade .
The Economics of Competitive Sports
Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing
Date: 29-05-2015
Funder priority for vaccines: Implications of a weak Lockean claim
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 19-08-2022
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.13075
Abstract: The development of some COVID‐19 vaccines by private companies like Moderna and Sanofi‐GSK has been substantially funded by various governments. While the Sanofi CEO has previously suggested that countries that fund this development ought to be given some priority, this suggestion has not been taken seriously in the literature. Considerations of nationalism, sustainability, need, and equitability have been more extensively discussed with respect to whether and how much a country is entitled to advance purchase orders of the vaccine under conditions of absolute scarcity. Yet, little attention has been paid to whether prior investment into developing a vaccine entitles a country to some priority with respect to these orders. Moreover, while not a majority view, some survey results show that a significant minority of the populace does endorse some view like this. This article argues that the minority have a point: recognizing funder countries some priority is justified by the weak Lockean claim (WLC). According to the WLC, the fact that someone has contributed to the development of something gives them some entitlement to the resultant product. This article will defend the WLC, and address objections to the argument, including those pertaining to questions of historical injustice and medical need. This argument does not imply an unconstrained entitlement. Rather, contribution to development is one morally relevant factor that must be tempered by and weighed against potentially more substantial claims to priority based on need, equity, and other considerations.
Related Organisations
University Of Maryland, Baltimore County
Location: United States of America
University Of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
Location: United States of America
Related Funding Activities
Discovery Projects - Grant ID: DP150102068
Start Date: 2015
End Date: 06-2018
Amount: $333,300.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityDiscovery Projects - Grant ID: DP190101597
Start Date: 06-2019
End Date: 12-2024
Amount: $380,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityLinkage Projects - Grant ID: LP190100841
Start Date: 04-2021
End Date: 12-2024
Amount: $475,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityDiscovery Projects - Grant ID: DP210102916
Start Date: 05-2021
End Date: 12-2024
Amount: $285,385.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityDiscovery Projects - Grant ID: DP130103658
Start Date: 03-2013
End Date: 12-2016
Amount: $340,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity