Health Care professionals working in disaster situations have to face urgent choices which diverge from their normal deontological ethos and are more utilitarian. Such is the triage system used to choose whom to treat. Instead of entering a crisis these professionals should be thought that ethics is not harmonizable to all situations and that there are situations in which saving as many lives as possible mean sacrificing others. This calls for defining a perimeter zone in which such choices occur, and (...) a time frame in which it ought to be considered ethical and legitimate to use such value laden choices. (shrink)

Malta traditionally enjoys a Roman Catholic Society, with the official religion of the country being cited in the second article of the constitution. Recently the government proposed to legislate to regulate human reproductive technology, in particular In Vitro Fertilization, which has been practiced for over two decades without controlling legislation. A Parliamentary Committee for social affairs was set up to study the situation inviting most stakeholders. The arguments gravitated mostly on issues of the status of the embryo and the media (...) played a considerable role. At the end of the discussion the Archbishop made a statement which pointed out that IVF involves destruction of embryos and the process stopped. This article examines what caused the deterioration of the process and points favourably towards a way forward within the context of a Catholic Country. (shrink)

Although principles, as a framework to resolving moral dilemmas are still debated and seem to be in a philosophical quagmire, there are strong arguments that by specification one can resolve case-specific dilemmas in certain areas of bioethics. When it comes to genetic screening and testing however, the problem at the base is a moral disagreement on higher-order principles—such as the status of the embryo and parental issues. No amount of specification can resolve these issues without a dose of relativism. We (...) explore a possibility of agreement on debatable areas specifically in regard to genetics—such as conferring status to the embryo solely for purposes of preventing genetic selection; but it is difficult to see how this can be incorporated into law without extrapolation to other areas. We conclude therefore that the four-principles approach, albeit valuable for expounding opposing views and discussing issues, cannot either alone or by specification, help resolve issues of genetic screening and testing without agreeing on higher order principle. This does not seem to be a possibility in the near future. (shrink)

Some time ago an article was published in this journal relating the difficulties of legislating for InVitro Fertilization in a Catholic country and the issues and side issues which had to be faced. Since then one has approached closer to having a law which regulates this technology. However several issues continue to challenge the country. The main concern, other than IVF not being a natural method of having children is the status of the embryo. The normative values of the country (...) in fact induces politicians to discuss an ‘embryology act’ rather than a ‘reproductive medicine’ act. At the eleventh hour Bishops continue to launch concerns which raises queries on how the debate moved forward over the past two decades. This paper tackles these issues and other more recent concerns and suggestions and takes a look at how such processes can be improved through a more rigorous understanding and logistic of dialogue, as certainly such debates should have implications for bioethics in general. Although the Church’s document Donum Vitae’s instructions for politicians where legislation for this technology has to occur has been vindicated, I seems that whilst many disputes have been resolved, the main conflict—that of the value of the conjugal act—has not. (shrink)

Is there a special Mediterranean approach to Bioethics and if so what are the roots of this approach? And why not a Bosphorus, or a ‘lake Michigan’ bioethics? The answer to such a question depends on the focus one takes on defining ‘Mediterranean’? On the one hand one can refer to the Mediterranean region which includes the surrounding coasts, having Europe on its northern coast line, northern Africa on its southern coast line (and these will include the north and South (...) West coasts), and in the Eastern region countries which border with Middle-Eastern countries. This approach is the approach currently being taken by European Parliamentarians when they speak about the Mediterranean, namely including countries like France, Italy and Libya. On the other hand there is the look upon the Mediterranean as ‘Southern Europe’; this is a more ‘traditional’ way on how westerners view the Mediterranean. This common approach is often recognized when, for example, we speak of ‘Mediterranean diet’, or, ‘Mediterranean Temperament’. It would include Eastern countries like Greece and Cyprus. This article focuses on these two approaches to Mediterranean ethics after discussing issues pertaining to the region which are important to define in this context. It then analyses the need for having a Mediterranean approach to bioethical issues. (shrink)

Pragmatic approaches to genetic testing are discussed and appraised. Whilst there are various schools of pragmatism, the Deweyan appraoch seems to be the most appreciated in bioethics as it allows a historical approach indebted to Hegel. This in turn allows the pragmatist to specify and balance principles in various contexts. There are problems with where to draw a line between what is referred to here as the micro- and macro-level of doing bioethics, unless one is simply to be classified as (...) a principlist. Whilst most discussions on genetics occur at a macro level, most specifying must be done also at a micro level – the clinical encounter. Whilst pragmatism encourages us to understand better social and scientific factors and puts into perspective statements like ‘playing God’, doubts are raised about the ‘consensus’ process and how one can put aside fundamental values such as the moral status of the embryo on which there is general disagreement. If those doing pragmatism do not endorse these values, there seems to be little ground for process and compromise with those who do. It seems therefore that pragmatism cannot ignore values, even those which are not endorsed by everyone. (shrink)

This paper discusses the issue of whether we have responsibilities to future generations with respect to genetic screening, including for purposes of selective abortion or discard. Future generations have been discussed at length among scholars. The concept of ‘Guardianfor Future Generations’ is tackled and its main criticisms discussed. Whilst germ-line cures, it is argued, can only affect family trees, genetic screening and testing can have wider implications. If asking how this may affect future generations is a legitimate question and since (...) we indeed make retrospective moral judgements, it would be wise to consider that future generations will make the same retrospective judgements on us. Moreover such technologies affect present embryos to which we indeed can be considered to have an obligation. (shrink)