Already a subscriber? Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Displaying: 1-10 of 21 documents


1. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
Edward J. Furton In This Issue
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
2. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
Kevin Wilger, Andrew Whitmore Colloquy
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
3. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
William L. Saunders Washington Insider
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
essays
4. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
Dominic R. Mangino The Internal Morality of Conscience: A Response to Ronit Stahl and Ezekiel Emanuel
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This essay challenges the relevance of the primary analogy in Ronit Stahl and Ezekiel Emanuel’s article “Physicians, Not Conscripts: Conscientious Objection in Health Care.” The author then proposes an alternative, classi­cally inspired model of conscience based on the work of E. Christian Brugger, Edmund Pellegrino, and Alasdair MacIntyre. This teleological model enables a more robust analysis of conscience claims than does Stahl and Emanuel’s social-constructivist framework.
5. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
Timothy Hsiao Why Recreational Drug Use Is Immoral
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper argues for two claims. First, recreational drug use is immoral because it undermines cognitive functioning. Second, for similar reasons, the state has a prima facie public policy interest in enacting legal restrictions on recreational drug use. In this context, “recreational drug use” refers to activities in which a person uses some intoxicating substance to impair, destroy, or otherwise frustrate the functioning of his cognitive faculties for the sake of pleasure or enjoyment.
6. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
Denis A. Scrandis Jacques Maritain on the Rights of Man and the Common Good
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The notion of a properly functioning human nature as a moral standard is a tenet of Western culture and is at the core Western humanism, Christian moral teaching, and natural law theory. Although these traditions recognize that the virtue of justice is exercised by giving one’s neighbor his due, they did not explore a person’s legitimate claims to goods in a modern theory of human rights. Enlightenment thinkers, as materialists and atheists, theorized that human rights are not related to God or human nature but are privileges granted by government. Jacques Maritain (1882–1973) developed theories of natural law and human rights. Maritain’s theory of human rights, employing a Thomistic methodology and founded on God and nature, is applicable to contemporary disputes, such as claims to a right to “same-sex” marriage.
7. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
Aldo Rocco Vitale Unified Opposition to Surrogacy: Comparing Feminist and Catholic Views
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This article briefly examines the topic of surrogacy in light of two opposing perspectives, mainstream feminism and Catholicism, which despite very different moral dimensions, arrive at the same conclusion. The author discusses the similarities between these two moral perspectives that are nor­mally considered to be opposed to each other.
articles
8. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
Daniel Patrone Compensation for the Moral Costs of Research-Related Injury
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In the United States, researchers are not legally required to compensate trial participants for research-related injuries. Nevertheless, institutional review boards (IRBs) ought to require that all research proposals include broad compensation plans. However, the standard justifications for mandatory compensation cannot reconcile the need for adequate participant protections with a duty on the part of the research community to provide them. This situation can be resolved only through a deeper analysis of research-related costs. Once mere costs are distinguished from moral costs, a compelling case can be made that the principle of respect for persons, or human dignity, provides a sound moral foundation for assigning responsibility for research-related injuries.
9. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
Michael G. Brungardt A Study of Accompaniment at the End of Life
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In discussions of end-of-life care and what the often-used but often-misunderstood buzzword “accompaniment” means, the core of the issue has often been missed, leading to inappropriate responses by physicians, loved ones, and the dying persons themselves. Emphasis is often placed on the care of circumstances rather than the care of persons. In what follows, these issues are systematically addressed to show that when patients face physical death, a truly ethical response is authentic, loving accompaniment of them. This form of such accompaniment is explored.
10. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 17 > Issue: 4
Paul W. Hruz The Use of Cross-Sex Steroids in the Treatment of Gender Dysphoria
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Current clinical guidelines for the treatment of individuals who experience gender dysphoria include the administration of testosterone to women who desire to appear as men and estrogen to men who desire to appear as women. Despite the rapid and widespread adoption of this practice, strikingly little scientific evidence supports this treatment approach as a safe and effective medical intervention to prevent associated depression and suicide. Although low-quality, short-term studies have demonstrated a reduction of dysphoria, emerging evidence reveals significant bodily harm from this practice and a lack of long-term benefit in preventing depression and suicide. From an ethical perspective, this practice distorts a proper view of human nature and violates bodily integrity by directly inducing sterility. The use of exogenous cross-sex hormones reinforces rather than alleviates underlying psychiatric dysfunction while significantly increasing the risk of other medical morbidities. Despite the valid goal of alleviating suffering, this practice cannot be justified by the use of the principles of totality or double effect.