The goal of this paper is both modest and ambitious. The modest goal is to show that intercountry adoption should be considered by ethicists and healthcare providers. The more ambitious goal is to introduce the many ethical issues that intercountry adoption raises. Intercountry adoption is an alternative to medical, assisted reproduction option such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), intracytoplasmic sperm injection, third party egg and sperm donation and surrogacy. Health care providers working with assisted reproduction are in a unique position (...) to introduce their clients to intercountry adoption; however, providers should only do so if intercountry adoption is ethically equal or superior to the alternatives. This paper first presents a brief history of intercountry adoption. The second section compares intercountry adoption with medical alternatives. The third section examines the unique ethical challenges that are not shared by other medical alternatives. The final section concludes that it is simplistic for a healthcare provider to promote intercountry adoption unconditionally; however, in situation where intercountry adoption is practiced conscientiously it poses no greater ethical concern than several medical alternatives. This conclusion is preliminary and is intended as a start for further discussion. (shrink)

The Global Christian Forum’s international gathering in Limuru, Kenya, in 2007, affirmed the value of this initiative for promoting relationships between Christian traditions with little if any mutual encounter. With this fresh mandate, the Forum organized further regional meetings and extended its methodology into other contexts. Following a second global gathering at Manado, Indonesia, in 2011, it continues to develop its activities. Though its minimal structures and staffing bring challenges, it still aims to deliver what has been described as ‘the (...) best value-for-money ecumenism in the world,’ acting in the service of, and in collaboration with, churches and ecclesial bodies. (shrink)

This commentary explores a few of the common threads in a symposium of obesity narratives in light of the American Medical Association’s classification of obesity as a disease. While the narratives illustrate the breadth of experiences, they each highlight the absence of a clear approach for the treatment of obesity, as well as the lack of conversation and compassion in the most basic of interactions with medical professionals. This could be cause for despair, yet we learn through these shared experiences (...) that we can take control of our care and plot a course for real and lasting assistance with this condition. (shrink)