Suchergebnisse

"Islamic Perspectives on the Principles of Biomedical Ethics presents results from a pioneering seminar in 2013 between Muslim religious scholars, biomedical scientists, and Western bioethicists at the research Center for Islamic Legislation & Ethics, Qatar Faculty of Islamic Studies. By examining principle-based bioethics, the contributors to this volume addressed a number of key issues related to the future of the field. Discussion is based around the role of religion in bioethical reasoning, specifically from an Islamic perspective. Also considered is a presentation of the concept of universal principles for bioethics, with a response looking at the possibility (or not) of involving religion. Finally, there is in-depth analysis of how far specific disciplines within the Islamic tradition — such as the higher objectives of Sharia (maqāṣid al-Sharī'ah) and legal maxims (qawā'id fiqhīyah) — can enrich principle-based bioethics."--Provided by publisher

This volume proposes a move away from the universalized and general modern ethical method, as it is currently practiced in biomedical ethics, while aiming toward a decision making process rooted in an ontology of relationality. Moyse uses the theological ethics of Karl Barth, in conversation with a range of thinkers, to achieve this turn

Koepsell et al. (2009) describe an ideal biomedical ethics committee environment with efficiencies such as electronic and universal application forms and consent templates, automated decision-trees, and broad sharing of data. However, it is unclear that a biomedical ethics ontology (BMEO) is necessary or even helpful in establishing such environment. Two features of any applied ontology are particularly problematic in establishing a useful BMEO: (1) an ontology is a description of a domain of reality; and (2) the description is subject to ongoing revision as it is developed through open processes, e.g., the use of a wiki. A BMEO would need to address two main kinds of entities, regulatory definitions and ethical concepts, and is ill-suited to both. Regulatory definitions are fiats and ought to be adopted verbatim to ensure compliance, but in such cases we do not need the assistance of ontologists, and their modes of working (constant revision within open wiki-based communities) might even be counterproductive. Ethical concepts within pluralistic societies are social constructs, not a priori concepts or biological natural kinds, and the prospects of generating intuitive definitions that enjoy broad acceptance across cultures and institutional settings are slim. In making these arguments, I draw from the writings of leading applied ontologists and Koepsell et al.'s own proof of concept.

Intro -- Title Page -- Foreword - Craig G. Bartholomew -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- Part One: The Rise and Dominance of Principles-Based Biomedical Ethics -- Chapter 1: The Rise of Principlism in Response to an Ethical Crisis -- Chapter 2: Challenges to Principlism -- Chapter 3: Perspectives on Principles from Diverse Faith Traditions -- Chapter 4: Richness and Depth of Understanding within Faith Traditions -- Part Two: A Modest Proposal for a Biblical Covenantal Biomedical Ethic -- Chapter 5: Conceptual Support for Covenantal Biomedical Ethics -- Chapter 6: Groundwork for a Contemporary Covenantal Ethic -- Chapter 7: Envisioning Medicine within a Covenantal Ethic -- Chapter 8: The Four Principles Revisited -- Epilogue: The End of the Beginning -- Appendix: The Hippocratic Oath -- Bibliography.

Traditionell spielten positivistische Ansätze in den Sportwissenschaften eine tragende Rolle. Dies bedeutet, dass Ethikkomitees nicht hinreichend sensibilisiert sein können für ethische Probleme, die durch qualitative Forschungsarbeiten aufgeworfen werden, wodurch umgekehrt qualitative Projektvorhaben benachteiligt werden können. In unserem Beitrag versuchen wir zu zeigen, dass das traditionelle biomedizinische Ethikmodell nur begrenzt taugt, wenn es um die Begutachtung von qualitativen Forschungsanträgen geht. So kann die Besonderheit qualitativer Methodik ethische Fragen aufwerfen, die der Beratung und nachträglichen Lösung im Forschungsprozess bedürfen. Auch gehen wir – im Unterschied zur Position vieler Ethikkomitees – davon aus, dass Methoden, die Täuschung oder verdeckte Beobachtung einschließen, unter bestimmten Bedingungen gerechtfertigt sein können. Dem übergeordneten Prinzip des Respekts gegen Personen verpflichtet kommen wir zu dem Schluss, dass Forschende ethischen Belangen in ihrer Forschungsarbeit hinreichend Raum geben sollten. Umgekehrt sollten Ethikkomitees akzeptieren, dass qualitative Forschung besondere Probleme aufwirft, die nicht per se unüberbrückbare Hindernisse für die Bewilligung von Forschungsvorhaben sein müssen.