Mianna Lotz

Discussion (day 2 session 1): Stem cell outlook

Publisher: Elsevier BV

Date: 2005

DOI: 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)62211-0

Systems advocacy in the professional practice of early childhood teachers: from the antithetical to the ethical

Publisher: Informa UK Limited

Date: 27-07-2016

DOI: 10.1080/09575146.2016.1209739

Surgical innovation as sui generis surgical research

Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Date: 16-11-2013

DOI: 10.1007/S11017-013-9272-2

Abstract: Successful innovative 'leaps' in surgical technique have the potential to contribute exponentially to surgical advancement, and thereby to improved health outcomes for patients. Such innovative leaps often occur relatively spontaneously, without substantial forethought, planning, or preparation. This feature of surgical innovation raises special challenges for ensuring sufficient evaluation and regulatory oversight of new interventions that have not been the subject of controlled investigatory exploration and review. It is this feature in particular that makes early-stage surgical innovation especially resistant to classification as 'research', with all of the attendant methodological and ethical obligations--of planning, regulation, monitoring, reporting, and publication--associated with such a classification. This paper proposes conceptual and ethical grounds for a restricted definition according to which innovation in surgical technique is classified as a form of sui generis surgical 'research', where the explicit goal of adopting such a definition is to bring about needed improvements in knowledge transfer and thereby benefit current and future patients.

Overstating the biological: geneticism and essentialism in social cloning and social sex selection

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Date: 2001

DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511545573.011

Identifying Surgical Innovation

Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Date: 02-2014

DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0B013E31829CCC5F

PROCREATIVE REASONS‐RELEVANCE: ON THE MORAL SIGNIFICANCE OF WHY WE HAVE CHILDREN

Publisher: Wiley

Date: 26-05-2009

DOI: 10.1111/J.1467-8519.2008.00656.X

Abstract: Advances in reproductive technologies - in particular in genetic screening and selection - have occasioned renewed interest in the moral justifiability of the reasons that motivate the decision to have a child. The capacity to select for desired blood and tissue compatibilities has led to the much discussed 'saviour sibling' cases in which parents seek to 'have one child to save another'. Heightened interest in procreative reasons is to be welcomed, since it prompts a more general philosophical interrogation of the grounds for moral appraisal of reasons-to-parent, and of the extent to which such reasons are relevant to the moral assessment of procreation itself. I start by rejecting the idea that we can use a distinction between 'other-regarding' and 'future-child-regarding' reasons as a basis on which to distinguish good from bad procreative reasons. I then offer and evaluate three potential grounds for elucidating and establishing a relationship between procreative motivation and the rightness/wrongness of procreative conduct: the predictiveness, the verdictiveness, and the expressiveness of procreative reasons.

Public funding of uterus transplantation: Deepening the socio‐moral critique

Publisher: Wiley

Date: 27-06-2021

DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12914

Abstract: Human uterus transplantation (UTx)—the most radical and experimental of all current forms of assisted reproduction—gives rise to a range of complex ethical questions, including those related to in idual safety, risk, and informed consent. I have argued elsewhere that the wider social impacts and implications of UTx provision must form part of a comprehensive ethical analysis. My socio‐moral critique of UTx provision has been responded to with a number of defences of possible public funding of UTx. In this paper I examine a select number of those defences. These include: that UTx provision would address harms and needs that already exist and as such have priority that UTx provision is fully compatible with the needed reform of the procreative context in which it would be offered that UTx provision would not necessarily involve legitimation or endorsement of what are widely agreed to be problematic pronatalist or geneticist norms and that UTx provision is required as a matter of justice and consistency with other practices. Importantly, defenders are not proposing a ceteris paribus justification of UTx provision nor do my responses to their arguments represent a comprehensive opposition to UTx. Rather, my more limited purpose here is to show that whatever other defences may be given of publicly funded UTx provision, those considered here do not ultimately succeed and therefore do not allay the concerns underpinning the original socio‐moral critique.

The Real Value of Child-Parent Vulnerability

Publisher: Informa UK Limited

Date: 24-06-2019

DOI: 10.1080/17496535.2019.1631870

Rethinking Procreation: Why it Matters Why We Have Children

Publisher: Wiley

Date: 04-03-2011

DOI: 10.1111/J.1468-5930.2011.00522.X

Childhood Obesity and the Question of Parental Liberty

Publisher: Wiley

Date: 06-2004

DOI: 10.1111/J.1467-9833.2004.00233.X

Commentary on Nicola Williams and Stephen Wilkinson: ‘Should Uterus Transplants Be Publicly Funded?’

Publisher: BMJ

Date: 09-03-2016

DOI: 10.1136/MEDETHICS-2015-103230

Families – Beyond the Nuclear Ideal

Publisher: Bloomsbury Academic

Date: 2012

DOI: 10.5040/9781780930114

Vulnerability and resilience: a critical nexus

Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Date: 02-2016

DOI: 10.1007/S11017-016-9355-Y

Abstract: Not all forms of human fragility or vulnerability are unavoidable. Sometimes we knowingly and intentionally impose conditions of vulnerability on others and sometimes we knowingly and intentionally enter into and assume conditions of vulnerability for ourselves (for ex le, when we decide to trust or forgive, enter into intimate relationships with others, become a parent, become a subject of medical or psychotherapeutic treatment, and the like). In this article, I propose a presently overlooked basis on which one might evaluate whether the imposition or assumption of vulnerability is acceptable, and on which one might ground a significant class of vulnerability-related obligations. Distinct from existing accounts of the importance of promoting autonomy in conditions of vulnerability, this article offers a preliminary exploration of the nature, role, and importance of resilience promotion, its relationship to autonomy promotion, and its prospects for improving human wellbeing in autonomy inhibiting conditions.

The Ethics of Uterus Transplantation

Publisher: Routledge

Date: 09-09-2020

DOI: 10.4324/9781003074984-36

Reproductive cloning and a (kind of) genetic fallacy

Publisher: Wiley

Date: 06-2005

DOI: 10.1111/J.1467-8519.2005.00439.X

Abstract: Many people now believe that human reproductive cloning--once sufficiently safe and effective--should be permitted on the grounds that it will allow the otherwise infertile to have children that are biologically closely related to them. However, though it is widely believed that the possession of a close genetic link to our children is morally significant and valuable, we argue that such a view is erroneous. Moreover, the claim that the genetic link is valuable is pernicious it tends to give rise to highly undesirable consequences, and therefore should be combated rather than pandered to. The emphasis on the genetic is unwarranted and unfortunate rather than giving us moral reason to support reproductive cloning in the case of infertility, the fact that cloning requests are likely to be motivated by the genetic argument gives us reason to oppose its availability.

The Regulation of Medical Device Representatives: A Question of Trust?

Publisher: Queensland University of Technology

Date: 24-05-2022

DOI: 10.5204/LTHJ.2281

Abstract: The introduction of new technologies in medical treatment has led to innovation in medical devices that are highly technical in their application and operation. The medical technology landscape is changeable and healthcare providers often turn to the medical device representatives (MDRs), employed by device manufacturers to help navigate the shifts and uncertainties. While the relationship between MDRs and healthcare providers can be a positive one focusing on appropriate use, selection and safety of devices, it is one that has evolved over time and is not independently regulated. In addition, patients, for the most part, are usually unaware of the involvement of MDRs in their healthcare. It is this knowledge gap with regard to the role of MDRs that is the focus of this paper. We argue that trust is at the heart of healthcare relationships and explore the nature of trust alongside the models of regulation of the medical device industry. We argue that MDRs may currently present a threat to both the interpersonal and the institutional trust of patients, and that regulation and policy responses are appropriate ways to address this risk. We consider potential regulatory frameworks and identify transparency and communication as the crucial characteristics of an appropriate response. We recommend that the polycentric nature of Australian healthcare regulation be cultivated through a multilayered approach, and that a positive obligation to inform the patient of the role of MDRs in their clinical care be established.

Procreation, Parenthood, and Educational Rights

Publisher: Routledge

Date: 20-01-2017

DOI: 10.4324/9781315465531

Ethical challenges of innovative surgery: a response to the IDEAL recommendations

Publisher: Elsevier BV

Date: 09-2010

DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61116-6

Getting Clearer About Surgical Innovation

Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Date: 12-2015

DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001174

THE ETHICS OF UTERUS TRANSPLANTATION

Publisher: Wiley

Date: 04-07-2011

DOI: 10.1111/J.1467-8519.2011.01897.X

Abstract: Human uterus transplantation (UTx) is currently under investigation as a treatment for uterine infertility. Without a uterus transplant, the options available to women with uterine infertility are adoption or surrogacy only the latter has the potential for a genetically related child. UTx will offer recipients the chance of having their own pregnancy. This procedure occurs at the intersection of two ethically contentious areas: assisted reproductive technologies (ART) and organ transplantation. In relation to organ transplantation, UTx lies with composite tissue transplants such as face and limb grafts, and shares some of the ethical concerns raised by these non-life saving procedures. In relation to ART, UTx represents one more avenue by which a woman may seek to meet her reproductive goals, and as with other ART procedures, raises questions about the limits of reproductive autonomy. This paper explores the ethical issues raised by UTx with a focus on the potential gap between women's desires and aspirations about pregnancy and the likely functional outcomes of successful UTx.

Feinberg, Mills, and the Child's Right to an Open Future

Publisher: Wiley

Date: 12-2006

DOI: 10.1111/J.1467-9833.2006.00356.X

Parental vulnerability

Publisher: Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Library

Date: 09-05-2017

DOI: 10.5324/EIP.V11I1.2246

Abstract: Increasing philosophical attention has recently focused on questions of the nature of vulnerability, and of the implications of recognizing and responding to vulnerability in human agents and subjects. Within that field of interest, explorations and analyses of the specific vulnerability of children have raised many interesting questions regarding the nature of childhood and the vulnerability-responsive obligations of parents. By contrast, there has been no philosophical recognition or discussion of parental vulnerability within the parent-child relationship. In this paper I seek to address that theoretical gap, exploring the distinct ways in which parents are vulnerable qua parents, as well as some of the normative implications that follow from a recognition of that vulnerability. These implications include claims of a vulnerability-based foundation for extensive parental authority over children, and the significant role of expanded social structures and mechanisms to more adequately support the parenting of our children.

Uterus transplantation as radical reproduction: Taking the adoption alternative more seriously

Publisher: Wiley

Date: 20-07-2018

DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12490

Abstract: This paper urges reconsideration of analyses of the alternatives to reproductive uterus transplantation (UTx). I focus here specifically on the adoption alternative. Importantly, my purpose is not to oppose UTx provision. Rather, it is to propose ways in which ethical analysis and provision of UTx can potentially accommodate the concerns discussed here. I argue that the adoption alternative to UTx is too readily dismissed, and that this is a dismissal with significant moral costs. I suggest that the radical nature of UTx as a form of assisted reproduction calls for an equivalently radical socio-moral agenda for reform and transformation of adoption law, policy and practice, as well as of the norms that prevail within our presently strongly bio-normative reproductive context. In doing so I widen the ethical frame of responsible provision of assisted reproduction to encompass not just obligations towards donors and recipient, but also our broader social responsibilities to ensure that we are doing our best to meet the significant needs of some of the most vulnerable members of our society.

Macquarie University

Location: Australia

View Organisation

Linkage Projects - Grant ID: LP110200217

Start Date: 01-2012

End Date: 12-2015

Amount: $255,000.00

Funder: Australian Research Council

Special Research Initiatives - Grant ID: SR0354516

Start Date: 01-2004

End Date: 03-2004

Amount: $10,000.00

Funder: Australian Research Council