Narrow search


By category:

By publication type:

By language:

By journals:

By document type:


Displaying: 21-40 of 717 documents

0.125 sec

21. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Rev. Nicanor Pier Giorgio Austriaco Science
22. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Allison LeDoux Emergency Contraception: Can It Be Morally Justified?
23. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Robert Scott Smith, M.D., Bryan A. Piras, Carr J. Smith The Bioethics of Gene Therapy
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Gene therapy is the modification of the human genetic code to prevent disease or cure illness. This technology is in its infancy and remains confined to experimental clinical trials. Once the present barriers are overcome, gene therapy will confront humanity with a host of ethical challenges. Therapies targeted to the genes of germ-line cells will introduce permanent changes to the human gene pool. Furthermore, nonmedical gene modifications have the potential to introduce a new form of eugenics into our society by which some members attempt to become inherently superior to others and humanity is re-engineered to man-made specifications. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.1 (Spring 2010): 45–50.
24. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Richard M. Doerflinger Washington Insider
25. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Rev. Benedict M. Guevin, O.S.B. Reproductive Technologies in Light of Dignitas personae
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The purpose of the Instruction Dignitas personae, issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, is not only to reaffirm the validity of the teaching laid out in Donum vitae (1987), with regard to both the principles on which it is based and the moral evaluations which it expresses, but to add needed clarification on reproductive technologies in the light of more recent developments. In addition to the reproductive technologies discussed in Dignitas personae, namely, homologous and heterologous artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, and intracytoplasmic sperm injection, the author also discusses other reproductive technologies, not covered by the Instruction, such as gamete intrafallopian transfer, zygote intrafallopian transfer, tubal embryo transfer, and pronuclear-stage embryo transfer. After analyzing each of these the author offers a general ethical evaluation. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.1 (Spring 2010): 51–59.
26. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Christopher Tollefsen Divine, Human, and Embryo Adoption: Some Criticisms of Dignitas personae
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The author shows how, by means of adoption, spouses become parents together and as the fruit of their marital love. The account serves two purposes. First, it allows a rebuttal of two types of objections to embryo adoption: that embryo adoption fails to respect the mutuality of marital love and that it in some way “constructs” parenthood. Second, the account makes it possible to recognize a deficiency in the way Dignitas personae understands embryo adoption, a deficiency indicated by the Instruction’s discussion of embryo adoption in the context of “treatments for infertility.” The author suggests that the Instruction is guilty of a misuse of terms and possibly a misunderstanding of the nature of adoption as such. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.1 (Spring 2010): 75–85.
27. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Tracy Jamison Embryo Adoption and the Design of Human Nature: The Analogy between Artificial Insemination and Artificial Impregnation
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Embryo adoption is an act of artificial impregnation. Artificial impregnation is analogous to artificial insemination. The conditions under which artificial impregnation is ethically acceptable may therefore be the same as the conditions under which artificial insemination is ethically acceptable. But artificial insemination is ethically acceptable only when it assists conjugal union to attain its natural purpose. If artificial impregnation is likewise ethically acceptable only insofar as it assists and does not replace conjugal union, then the presence or absence of the conjugal act itself is the fundamental moral criterion by which to judge whether to permit or exclude artificial impregnation. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.1 (Spring 2010): 111–122.
28. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Jason T. Eberl What Dignitas personae Does Not Say
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Dignitas personae has garnered significant attention both inside and outside Roman Catholic circles, but it lacks the argumentative force not only to present the Church’s ethical judgment but also to persuade non-sympathetic readers. More direct engagement with contrary views would provide a stronger foundation for constructing arguments in public discourse. This article highlights various assertions found in Dignitas personae which call for greater explicit argumentation. Subjects treated include the ontological and moral status of human embryos, prenatal adoption, potentially abortifacient contraceptives, reproductive cloning, and alternatives to human embryonic stem cell research, such as induced pluripotent stem cells and animal–human chimeras. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.1 (Spring 2010): 89–110.
29. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Christopher Kaczor, Ph.D. Philosophy and Theology
30. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
E. Christian Brugger Parthenotes, iPS Cells, and the Product of ANT-OAR: A Moral Assessment Using the Principles of Hylomorphism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Dignitas personae teaches that before research into certain alternative techniques for deriving human pluripotent stem cells can be licit, it is necessary to have moral certitude that no human embryo is brought into existence by those techniques. This article evaluates three such techniques—human parthenogenesis, ANT-OAR, and direct cellular reprogramming—and asks whether at present such moral certitude is achievable. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.1 (Spring 2010): 123–142.
31. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 1
Greg F. Burke, M.D., F.A.C.P. Medicine
32. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 2
William L. Saunders Jr. Washington Insider
33. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 2
Edward J. Furton Embryo Adoption Reconsidered
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The question of embryo adoption remains unresolved. Dignitas personae expresses reservations about the practice, but does not reject it. A proper interpretation of Dignitas personae n. 19 shows that the Vatican does not hold that human embryo adoption is intrinsically immoral, but that the question of its morality depends on the circumstances that surround the practice. Embryo adoption as practiced today is often compromised by illicit cooperation with objectionable reproductive technologies; nonetheless, it is possible to identify a best case scenario which may lessen or even eliminate these concerns. That best case is when a Catholic couple, who have not previously utilized in vitro fertilization to overcome a problem of infertility, adopt an abandoned embryo and choose to raise that child as their own. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.2 (Summer 2010): 329–347.
34. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 2
Alvin Wong, M.D. Dignitas personae and Cell Line Independence
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The recent Instruction Dignitas personae from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith formally addresses the issue of the use of biological material of illicit origin. We now face the challenge of applying the principles it sets forth to daily realities. While the issue of vaccines that use such illicit cell lines has been addressed, other scenarios involving the everyday scientist or researcher in the laboratory or clinic will have to be confronted. It is a critical time for the cell line issue, and much work is needed by the scientific community to find ethical solutions. This article hopes to encourage positive steps in that direction. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.2 (Summer 2010): 273–280.
35. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 2
Lawrence Masek On Some Proposals for Producing Human Stem Cells
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The author argues that an action is morally wrong if any of its steps serves no purpose apart from preventing the existence of a human being. This principle entails that contraception and some proposed techniques for altered nuclear transfer are morally wrong, but it does not preclude producing stem cells through parthenogenesis. His argument depends on the premise that human life always is a good, including human life produced through immoral actions. The immoral action, not the life caused by the action, is the evil that should be prevented. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.2 (Summer 2010): 257–264.
36. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 2
Mark S. Latkovic The Dignity of the Person: An Overview and Commentary on Dignitas personae
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This article provides a detailed overview and critical commentary on the Instruction Dignitas personae from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a document that updates Donum vitae. First, it situates the Instruction in the context of modern society’s reliance on biotechnology to overcome infertility, while also examining technology’s wider impact on human persons—for example, on their relationship with God. It then examines the teaching of the document while at the same time offering critical comments on it, pointing out both strengths and weaknesses in, for example, its treatment of the issue of human embryo adoption. It concludes with some general comments on how the Instruction will influence Catholic bioethics in both theory and practice. Throughout the article, it is often noted how Dignitas personae compares with its predecessor, Donum vitae. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.2 (Summer 2010): 283–305.
37. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 2
John S. Grabowski, Christopher Gross Dignitas personae and the Adoption of Frozen Embryos: A New Chill Factor?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith’s Dignitas personae does not offer a definitive rejection of the practice of human embryo adoption as intrinsically evil, but neither does it simply leave the matter an “open question.” The document does indeed oppose the practice, but its reasons for doing so are not clearly stated and seem to be in tension with its own affirmations of the personal dignity of embryos and the goodness of adoption. The Congregation’s opposition is therefore best read as a prudential judgment that embryo adoption cannot be justified in the present circumstances due to the potential for scandal and the cooperation with the fertility industry which it involves. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.2 (Summer 2010): 307–328.
38. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 2
Rev. Nicanor Pier Giorgio Austriaco Using Morally Controversial Human Cell Lines after Dignitas personae
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Human cell lines are well-characterized laboratory cultures of human cells derived from a single source. In recent years, much moral controversy has surrounded human cell lines and biological materials obtained from aborted fetuses and destructive human embryo research. Dignitas personae instructs scientists of good conscience to avoid using biological materials of illicit origin, to distance themselves from evil, and to avoid scandal. The author suggests that the Instruction allows a scientist to delay discontinuing the use of a morally controversial cell line for a reasonable amount of time and allows a citizen of conscience to financially support—in a limited and restricted manner governed by prudence—philanthropic organizations that fund controversial biomedical research programs. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.2 (Summer 2010): 265–272.
39. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 2
Nicanor Pier Giorgio Austriaco Science
40. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly: Volume > 10 > Issue: 2
Christopher Kaczor, Ph.D. Philosophy and Theology