<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy via MedWorm.com</title>
        <description>MedWorm.com provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest items from the 'The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy' source.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=The+Journal+of+Medicine+and+Philosophy&t=The+Journal+of+Medicine+and+Philosophy&s=Search&f=source]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:31:35 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Subscription.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3362720&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20223857%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: 
    
    PMID: 20223857 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3362720</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:42:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3362720</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Editorial board.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3362719&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20223858%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: 
    
    PMID: 20223858 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3362719</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:42:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3362719</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cover.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3362718&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20223859%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: 
    
    PMID: 20223859 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3362718</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:42:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3362718</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Genetic Testing, Conscientious Refusal of Medical Treatment to Children, and Organ Donation: An Introduction.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3340096&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20203138%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Hinkley AE
    
    PMID: 20203138 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3340096</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3340096</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Organ Donation by Capital Prisoners in China: Reflections in Confucian Ethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3328151&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20197306%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article discusses the practice and development of organ donation by capital prisoners in China. It analyzes the issue of informed consent regarding organ donation from capital prisoners in light of Confucian ethics and expounds the point that under the influence of Confucianism, China is a country that attaches great importance to the role of the family in practicing informed consent in various areas, the area of organ donation from capital prisoners included. It argues that a proper form of organ donation from capital prisoners can be justified within the Confucian moral context in which the proper interests of capital prisoners and their families, the benefit of organ receptors, and a rightful order of society should all be appropriately considered. From the Confucian perspective, t...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3328151</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3328151</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Reevaluating the Dead Donor Rule.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3316325&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20185451%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Collins M
    The dead donor rule justifies current practice in organ procurement for transplantation and states that organ donors must be dead prior to donation. The majority of organ donors are diagnosed as having suffered brain death and hence are declared dead by neurological criteria. However, a significant amount of unrest in both the philosophical and the medical literature has surfaced since this practice began forty years ago. I argue that, first, declaring death by neurological criteria is both unreliable and unjustified but further, the ethical principles which themselves justify the dead donor rule are better served by abandoning that rule and instead allowing individuals who have suffered severe and irreversible brain damage to become organ donors, even though they ar...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3316325</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3316325</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Evolutionary Biological Implications of Human Genetic Engineering.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3316324&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20185452%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Powell R
    A common worry about the genetic engineering of human beings is that it will reduce human genetic diversity, creating a biological monoculture that could not only increase our susceptibility to disease but also hasten the extinction of our species. Thus far, however, the evolutionary implications of human genetic modification remain largely unexplored. In this paper, I consider whether the widespread use of genetic engineering technology is likely to narrow the present range of genetic variation, and if so, whether this would in fact lead to the evolutionary harms that some authors envision. By examining the nature of biological variation and its relation to population immunity and evolvability, I show that not only will genetic engineering have a negligible impact on...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3316324</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3316324</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>From Brute Luck to Option Luck? On Genetics, Justice, and Moral Responsibility in Reproduction.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3312091&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20181644%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Denier Y
    The structure of our ethical experience depends, crucially, on a fundamental distinction between what we are responsible for doing or deciding and what is given to us. As such, the boundary between chance and choice is the spine of our conventional morality, and any serious shift in that boundary is thoroughly dislocating. Against this background, I analyze the way in which techniques of prenatal genetic diagnosis (PGD) pose such a fundamental challenge to our conventional ideas of justice and moral responsibility. After a short description of the situation, I first examine the influential luck egalitarian theory of justice, which is based on the distinction between choice and luck or, more specifically, between option luck and brute luck, and the way in which it woul...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3312091</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3312091</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Genetic Nondiscrimination and Health Care as an Entitlement.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3312090&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20181645%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Kious BM
    The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 prohibits most forms of discrimination on the basis of genetic information in health insurance and employment. The findings cited as justification for the act, the almost universal political support for it, and much of the scholarly literature about genetic discrimination, all betray a confusion about what is really at issue. They imply that genetic discrimination is wrong mainly because of genetic exceptionalism: because some special feature of genetic information makes discrimination on the basis thereof wrong. I suggest, to the contrary, that the best arguments against genetic discrimination assume that health care is an entitlement. I do this by examining two different exceptionalist arguments for genetic nondi...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3312090</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3312090</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bioethics and &quot;Human Dignity&quot;</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3312089&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20181646%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Jordan MC
    The term &quot;human dignity&quot; is the source of considerable confusion in contemporary bioethics. It has been used by Kantians to refer to autonomy, by others to refer to the sanctity of life, and by still others (e.g., the President's Council on Bioethics) to refer-albeit obliquely-to an important but infrequently discussed set of human goods. In the first part of this article, I seek to disambiguate the notion of human dignity. The second part is a defense of the philosophical utility of such a notion; I argue that there is nothing implausible about appealing to a deontological &quot;principle of dignity&quot; to solve bioethical problems, especially those concerning the development of new biotechnologies. There may, however, be problems associated with any attempt to use dignity ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3312089</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3312089</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Illusion of Consensus: Harvesting Human Organs from Prisoners Convicted of Capital Crimes.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3303130&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20176708%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Cherry MJ
    
    PMID: 20176708 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3303130</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3303130</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rawls and the Refusal of Medical Treatment to Children.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3303129&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20176709%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Macdougall DR
    That Jehovah's Witnesses cannot refuse life-saving blood transfusions on behalf of their children has acquired the status of virtual &quot;consensus&quot; among bioethicists. However strong the consensus may be on this matter, this article explores whether this view can be plausibly defended on liberal principles by examining it in light of one particularly well worked-out liberal political theory, that of Rawls. It concludes that because of the extremely high priority Rawls attributes to &quot;freedom of conscience,&quot; and the implication from the original position that parents must act paternalistically toward their children as their protectors, Jehovah's Witnesses cannot legitimately be barred from making decisions on behalf of their children, even when the consequences of suc...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3303129</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3303129</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Organ Donation and Global Bioethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3303128&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20176710%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Iltis AS
    
    PMID: 20176710 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3303128</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3303128</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Clinical Research in Context: Reexamining the Distinction between Research and Practice.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3153984&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20054011%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Anderson JA
    At least since the seminal work of the (US) National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research in the 1970s, a fundamental distinction between research and practice has underwritten both conceptual work in research ethics and regulations governing research involving human subjects. Notwithstanding its undoubted historical importance, I believe the distinction is problematic because it misrepresents clinical inquiry. In this essay, I aim to clarify the character of clinical inquiry by identifying crucial contextual constraints on justification constitutive of clinical science. This analysis shows that, from an epistemological point of view, clinical research and clinical practice are not sharply distinct but intimately int...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3153984</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3153984</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Disambiguating Clinical Intentions: The Ethics of Palliative Sedation.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3153983&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20054012%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Jansen LA
    It is often claimed that the intentions of physicians are multiple, ambiguous, and uncertain-at least with respect to end-of-life care. This claim provides support for the conclusion that the principle of double effect is of little or no value as a guide to end-of-life pain management. This paper critically discusses this claim. It argues that proponents of the claim fail to distinguish two different senses of &quot;intention,&quot; and that, as a result, they are led to exaggerate the extent to which clinical intentions in end-of-life contexts are ambiguous and uncertain. It argues further that physicians, like others who make life and death decisions, have a duty to get clear on what their intentions are. Finally, it argues that even if the principle of double effect should ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3153983</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3153983</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Selective Terminations and Respect for the Disabled.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3122613&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20034993%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Stangl R
    It is widely thought that abortion on the grounds of fetal abnormality is morally justified. More controversially, Peter Singer has argued that some infants with severe disabilities ought to be killed. Many disability rights activists object that such claims and practices express disrespect toward disabled persons, even if fetuses and infants are only potentially persons. This can seem puzzling. If disabled fetuses are not members of the community of disabled persons, how can our treatment of the former express disrespect toward the latter? In what follows, I shall argue for two claims: first, the he puzzle is only apparent because whether we respect someone depends not only on how we do treat him but also on how we would treat him were circumstances different, and se...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3122613</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3122613</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Exceptional Ethics of the Investigator-Subject Relationship.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3114392&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20026526%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article concerns the validity of six canonical rules that institutional review boards use to constrain the behavior of investigators. These rules require investigators to design their studies in a scientifically valid way, not pay their subjects to take risks, minimize risks to their subjects, secure for their subjects access to effective interventions post-trial, not pay their subjects too much and allow their subjects to withdraw from the study unconditionally. Enforcement of these rules is problematic because there are other relationships that seem to be like the investigator-subject relationship in all ethically relevant respects, such as the employer-employee and volunteer organizer-volunteer relationships, to which we would not dream of applying these same rules. Applying these ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3114392</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3114392</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Proper Role of Evidence in Complementary/Alternative Medicine.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3114383&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20026527%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Hansen K, Kappel K
    In this article we explore the role evidence ought to play in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). First, we consider the claim that evidence in the form of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) cannot be obtained for CAMs. Second, we consider various claims to the effect that there are ways of obtaining evidence that do not make use of RCTs. We argue that there is no good reason why CAM should be exempted from the general requirement that treatments undergo evaluation by RCT. Third, we consider two implications for health care policy. First, many activities in conventional medicine have never been rigorously evaluated and are widely in use nonetheless. We argue that this fails to provide a reason for exempting CAM from a demand for evidence. Second, ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3114383</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3114383</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>La Frontera: Responsibly Managing Borders and Boundaries in Clinical Ethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3114382&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D20026528%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: McCullough LB
    The papers in the 2010 &quot;Clinical Ethics&quot; number of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy explore issues along La Frontera, the borders and boundaries of clinical ethics. The first three papers in this &quot;Clinical Ethics&quot; number of the Journal explore borders and boundaries drawn within clinical ethics, concerning the moral standing of complementary and alternative medicine, palliative sedation, and induced abortion and feticide. The fourth and fifth papers explore the borders and boundaries between research ethics and clinical ethics.
    PMID: 20026528 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3114382</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3114382</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Subcription.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3009197&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19920167%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: 
    
    PMID: 19920167 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3009197</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:32:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3009197</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Editorial Board.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3009196&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19920168%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: 
    
    PMID: 19920168 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3009196</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:32:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3009196</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cover.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3009195&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19920169%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: 
    
    PMID: 19920169 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3009195</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:32:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3009195</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Litmus Test for Exploitation: James Stacey Taylor's Stakes and Kidneys.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2953381&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19880546%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Kuntz JR
    James Stacy Taylor advances a thorough argument for the legalization of markets in current (live) human kidneys. The market is seemly the most abhorrent type of market, a market where the least well-off sell part of their body to the most well off. Though rigorously defended overall, his arguments concerning exploitation are thin. I examine a number of prominent bioethicists' account of exploitation: most importantly, Ruth Sample's exploitation as degradation. I do so in the context of Taylor's argument, with the aim of buttressing Taylor's position that a regulated kidney market is morally allowable. I argue that Sample fails to provide normative grounds consistent with her claim that exploitation is wrong. I then reformulate her account for consistency and plausibil...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2953381</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2953381</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Organ Markets and the Ends of Medicine.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2953380&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19880547%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Davis FD, Crowe SJ
    As the gap between the need for and supply of human organs continues to widen, the aim of securing additional sources of these &quot;gifts of the body&quot; has become a seemingly overriding moral imperative, one that could-and some argue, should-override the widespread ban on organ markets. As a medical practice, organ transplantation entails the inherent risk that one human being, a donor, will become little more than a means to the end of healing for another human being and that he or she will come to have a purely instrumental value. With the establishment of organ markets, not only will the harms of instrumentalization be a reality-the ends of medicine will be further compromised and confused.
    PMID: 19880547 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Jo...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2953380</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2953380</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Autonomy and Organ Sales, Revisited.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2953378&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19880548%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Taylor JS
    In this paper I develop and defend my arguments in favor of the moral permissibility of a legal market for human body parts in response to the criticisms that have been leveled at them by Paul M. Hughes and Samuel J. Kerstein.
    PMID: 19880548 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2953378</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2953378</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Constraint, Consent, and Well-Being in Human Kidney Sales.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2953377&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19880549%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Hughes PM
    This paper canvasses recent arguments in favor of commercial markets in human transplant kidneys, raising objections to those arguments on grounds of the role of injustice, exploitation, and coercion in compromising the autonomy of those most likely to sell a kidney, namely, the least well off members of society.
    PMID: 19880549 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2953377</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2953377</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Introduction: Symposium on a Regulated Market in Transplantable Organs.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2917915&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19846477%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Hippen BE
    
    PMID: 19846477 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2917915</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2917915</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Should We Compensate Organ Donors When We Can Continue to Take Organs for Free? A Response to Some of My Critics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2917914&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19846478%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Cherry MJ
    In Kidney for Sale by Owner: Human Organs, Transplantation, and the Market, I argued that the market is the most efficient and effective-and morally justified-means of procuring and allocating human organs for transplantation. This special issue of The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy publishes several articles critical of this position and of my arguments mustered in its support. In this essay, I explore the core criticisms these authors raise against my conclusions. I argue that clinging to comfortable, but unfounded, notions that human body parts are not commodities, that the physician-patient relationship transcends commercial practices, and that medicine rises above market-place morality (where &quot;market-place morality&quot; is presented rhetorically as a criticism) ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2917914</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2917914</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Autonomy, Moral Constraints, and Markets in Kidneys.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2917911&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19846479%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article concerns the morality of establishing regulated kidney markets in an effort to reduce the chronic shortage of kidneys for transplant. The article tries to rebut the view, recently defended by James Taylor, that if we hold autonomy to be intrinsically valuable, then we should be in favor of such markets. The article then argues that, under current conditions, the buying and selling of organs in regulated markets would sometimes violate two Kantian principles that are seen as moral constraints. One principle forbids expressing disrespect for the dignity of humanity; the other forbids treating others merely as means. In light of the moral danger posed by regulated markets, the article advocates an alternative way of diminishing the current organ shortage, namely opt-out systems o...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2917911</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2917911</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Animal-Human Chimeras, Sexually Deviant Behavior, and Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Introduction.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2752462&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19717525%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Hinkley AE
    
    PMID: 19717525 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2752462</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2752462</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What They Mean by &quot;Good Science': The Medical Community's Response to Boutique Fetal Ultrasounds.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2725350&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19696156%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Raucher MS
    Since 1994, when the first fetal imaging boutique appeared in Texas, many sites have been established around the country for parents to receive nonmedical fetal imaging using three- and four-dimensional ultrasound machines. These businesses boast the benefits they offer to parental-fetal bonding, but the medical community objects to the use of ultrasound machines for nonmedical purposes. In this article, I present the statements released by the medical community, highlighting the alarmist strategies used to paint boutique ultrasounds as bad science and elevate the medical use of ultrasounds. Through a close reading of the statements, it is shown that the medical community's primary concern is not the health of the fetus or the woman but rather their place as the sol...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2725350</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2725350</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Metaphysical and Ethical Perspectives on Creating Animal-Human Chimeras.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2720454&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19692673%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Eberl JT, Ballard RA
    This paper addresses several questions related to the nature, production, and use of animal-human (a-h) chimeras. At the heart of the issue is whether certain types of a-h chimeras should be brought into existence, and, if they are, how we should treat such creatures. In our current research environment, we recognize a dichotomy between research involving nonhuman animal subjects and research involving human subjects, and the classification of a research protocol into one of these categories will trigger different ethical standards as to the moral permissibility of the research in question. Are a-h chimeras entitled to the more restrictive and protective ethical standards applied to human research subjects? We elucidate an Aristotelian-Thomistic metaphysic...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2720454</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2720454</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Search for Reasons in a Unified Relationship.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2720453&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19692674%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Koppelman-White ER
    The paternalism, autonomy debate was influenced by traditional ideas that reasons are either objective (based on values existing independent of any particular person) or subjective (based on values tied to individual's personal histories). This dichotomy has been rewarding for the health care community. However, the tenets of this debate have influenced the nature of deliberation in a way that seriously compromises the ability of health care professionals and patients to bring reflection (the search for justified reasons) to a successful end. It sets up the moral landscape not as one of unity and reciprocity, but as one of divisiveness and distance-where one person (the physician) does something to another (paternalism) or for another (patient autonomy), rat...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2720453</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2720453</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Evidence-Based Medicine Must Be ...</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2720457&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19690324%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: La Caze A
    Proponents of evidence-based medicine (EBM) provide the &quot;hierarchy of evidence&quot; as a criterion for judging the reliability of therapeutic decisions. EBM's hierarchy places randomized interventional studies (and systematic reviews of such studies) higher in the hierarchy than observational studies, unsystematic clinical experience, and basic science. Recent philosophical work has questioned whether EBM's special emphasis on evidence from randomized interventional studies can be justified. Following the critical literature, and in particular the work of John Worrall, I agree that many of the arguments put forward by advocates of EBM do not justify the ambitious claims that are often made on behalf of randomization. However, in contrast to the recent philosophical work,...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2720457</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2720457</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Sex, Immorality, and Mental Disorders.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2720456&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19690325%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Gert B, Culver CM
    Although the definition of a mental disorder has remained essentially the same from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder, Third Edition, Revised (DSM-III-R) through DSM-IV to DSM-IV-TR, the account of the paraphilias has changed continually. Although the definition in all the DSMs explicitly rules out deviant sexual behavior as sufficient for labeling someone as having a mental disorder, deviant sexual behavior counts as sufficient for all the paraphilias in DSM-III-R. In DSM-IV, the account of all the paraphilias is made consistent with the definition. In DSM-IV-TR, mere deviant sexual behavior is not sufficient for being classified as having a paraphilia, but immoral deviant sexual behavior is. Thus, in DSM-IV-TR, only those paraphilias that...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2720456</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2720456</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Regulatory Argument Against Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2720455&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19690326%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article explores the plausibility of an argument against embryonic stem cell research based on what the regulations already say about research on pregnant women and fetuses. The center of the argument is the notion of vulnerability and whether such a concept is applicable to human embryos. It is argued that such an argument can be made plausible. The article concludes by responding to several important objections.
    PMID: 19690326 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2720455</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2720455</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who Can Resist Foucault?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2549038&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19549725%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Bleakley A, Bligh J
    Michel Foucault's analysis of &quot;the birth of the clinic&quot; describes the genesis of a unified discourse that, in retrospect, has shaped western medicine for two centuries. However, in looking prospectively toward a 21st century medicine, Foucault's analysis is necessary but not sufficient. To better critically address medicine and medical education in the era of simulation, we could draw on frameworks developed by futurists such as Jean Baudrillard. Foucault's analysis does not account for contemporary, complex developments of the clinical gaze as the gaze is distributed across practitioners in increasing use of sophisticated, representational diagnostic imaging. Further, Foucault's antihumanist rhetoric sometimes strays into the antihumane, and this is distur...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2549038</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2549038</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Docile Bodies: Transnational Research Ethics as Biopolitics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2549037&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19549726%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Lysaught MT
    This essay explores the claim that bioethics has become a mode of biopolitics. It seeks to illuminate one of the myriad of ways that bioethics joins other institutionalized discursive practices in the task of producing, organizing, and managing the bodies-of policing and controlling populations-in order to empower larger institutional agents. The focus of this analysis is the contemporary practice of transnational biomedical research. The analysis is catalyzed by the enormous transformation in the political economy of transnational research that has occurred over the past three decades and the accompanying increase in the numbers of human bodies now subjected to research. This essay uses the work of Michel Foucault, particularly his notion of docile bodies, to anal...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2549037</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2549037</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Foucauldian Diagnostics: Space, Time, and the Metaphysics of Medicine.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2549041&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19546145%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Bishop JP
    This essay places Foucault's work into a philosophical context, recognizing that Foucault is difficult to place and demonstrates that Foucault remains in the Kantian tradition of philosophy, even if he sits at the margins of that tradition. For Kant, the forms of intuition-space and time-are the a priori conditions of the possibility of human experience and knowledge. For Foucault, the a priori conditions are political space and historical time. Foucault sees political space as central to understanding both the subject and objects of medicine, psychiatry, and the social sciences. Through this analysis one can see that medicine's metaphysics is a metaphysics of efficient causation, where medicine's objects are subjected to mechanisms of efficient control.
    PMID: 19...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2549041</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2549041</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Governmentality, Biopower, and the Debate over Genetic Enhancement.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2549040&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19546146%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: McWhorter L
    Although Foucault adamantly refused to make moral pronouncements or dictate moral principles or political programs to his readers, his work offers a number of tools and concepts that can help us develop our own ethical views and practices. One of these tools is genealogical analysis, and one of these concepts is &quot;biopower.&quot; Specifically, this essay seeks to demonstrate that Foucault's concept of biopower and his genealogical method are valuable as we consider moral questions raised by genetic enhancement technologies. First, it examines contemporary debate over the development, marketing, and application of such technologies, suggesting that what passes for ethical deliberation is often little more than political maneuvering in a field where stakes are very high an...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2549040</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2549040</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Foucault, Genealogy, Ethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2549039&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19546147%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Scott CE
    By establishing the sciences of life while, at the same time, forming a certain self-knowledge, the human being altered itself as a living being by taking on the character of a rational subject acquiring the power to act on itself, changing its living conditions and its own life .... [There is a] kinship between the discourse on limit-experience, when it was a matter of the subject transforming itself, and the discourse on the transformation of the subject itself through the construction of a knowledge. (Foucault, 2000, 296)1.
    PMID: 19546147 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2549039</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2549039</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Revisiting Foucault.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2549042&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19541790%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Bishop JP
    
    PMID: 19541790 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2549042</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2549042</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Human dignity and human rights as a common ground for a global bioethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2472565&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19386998%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Andorno R
    The principle of respect for human dignity plays a crucial role in the emerging global norms relating to bioethics, in particular in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. This instrument, which is a legal, not merely an ethical document, can be regarded as an extension of international human rights law into the field of biomedicine. Although the Declaration does not explicitly define human dignity, it would be a mistake to see the emphasis put on this notion as a mere rhetorical strategy. Rather, the appeal to dignity reflects a real concern about the need to promote respect both for the intrinsic worth of human beings and for the integrity of the human species. But dignity alone cannot solve most of the dilemmas posed by biomedical practice...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2472565</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2472565</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>UNESCO, &quot;universal bioethics,&quot; and state regulation of health risks: a philosophical critique.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2472544&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19386999%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Cherry MJ
    The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization's (UNESCO) Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights announces a significant array of welfare entitlements--to personal health and health care, medicine, nutrition, water, improved living conditions, environmental protection, and so forth--as well as corresponding governmental duties to provide for such public health measures, though the simple expedient of announcing that such entitlements are &quot;basic human rights.&quot; The Universal Declaration provides no argument for the legitimacy of the sweeping governmental authority, taxation, and regulation to create and impose such &quot;rights.&quot; As this paper explores that some action promotes a purported good, such as &quot;health,&quot; does not thereby make the...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2472544</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2472544</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Solidarity and the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2472525&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19387000%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Gunson D
    Recent work has stressed the importance of the concept of solidarity to bioethics and social philosophy generally. But can and should it feature in documents such as the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights as anything more than a vague notion with multiple possible interpretations? Although noting the tension between universality and particularity that such documents have to deal with, and also noting that solidarity has a political content, the paper explores the suggestion that solidarity should feature more centrally in international regulations. The paper concludes with the view that when solidarity is seen aright, the UDBHR is an implicitly solidaristic document.
    PMID: 19387000 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philoso...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2472525</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2472525</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bioethics as public discourse and second-order discipline.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2472507&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19387001%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Kopelman LM
    Bioethics is best viewed as both a second-order discipline and also part of public discourse. Since their goals differ, some bioethical activities are more usefully viewed as advancing public discourse than academic disciplines. For example, the &quot;Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights&quot; sponsored by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization seeks to promote ethical guidance on bioethical issues. From the vantage of philosophical ethics, it fails to rank or specify its stated principles, justify controversial principles, clarify key terms, or say what is meant by calling potentially conflicting norms &quot;foundational.&quot; From the vantage of improving the public discourse about bioethical problems and seeking ethical solutions in th...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2472507</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2472507</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights: a canon for the ages?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2472487&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19387002%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Trotter G
    The UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights of 2005 purports to articulate universal norms for bioethics. However, this document has met with mixed reviews. Some deny that the elaboration of universal bioethics norms is needed; some deny that UNESCO has the expertise or authority to articulate such norms; some regard the content of the UNESCO document as too vague or general to be useful; and some regard the document as a cog in the effort of like-minded cosmopolitans to codify their particular moral intuitions in international law. This issue examines the potential merits and pitfalls of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights.
    PMID: 19387002 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2472487</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2472487</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bioethics and self-governance: the lessons of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2472466&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19395366%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Snead OC
    The following article analyzes the process of conception, elaboration, and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights, and reflects on the lessons it might hold for public bioethics on the international level. The author was involved in the process at a variety of levels: he provided advice to the IBC on behalf of the President's Council of Bioethics; he served as the U.S. representative to UNESCO's Intergovernmental Bioethics Committee; and led the U.S. Delegation in the multilateral negotiation of Government experts that culminated in the adoption of the declaration in its final form. The author is currently serving a 4-year term as a member of UNESCO's International Bioethics Committee.
    PMID: 19395366 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2472466</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2472466</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Normative foundations of technology transfer and transnational benefit principles in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2472443&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19395367%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Faunce TA, Nasu H
    The United Nations Scientific, Education, and Cultural Organization Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UDBHR) expresses in its title and substance a controversial linkage of two normative systems: international human rights law and bioethics. The UDBHR has the status of what is known as a &quot;nonbinding&quot; declaration under public international law. The UDBHR's foundation within bioethics (and association, e.g., with virtue-based or principlist bioethical theories) is more problematic. Nonetheless, the UDBHR contains socially important principles of technology transfer and transnational benefit (articles 14, 15, and 21). This paper is one of the first to explore how the disciplines of bioethics and international human rights law may interact in t...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2472443</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2472443</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Introduction.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2259009&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19276130%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Bulcock JA
    
    PMID: 19276130 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2259009</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2259009</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis, Reproductive Freedom, and Deliberative Democracy.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2234790&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19251775%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Farrelly C
    In this paper I argue that the account of deliberative democracy advanced by Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson (1996, 2004) is a useful normative theory that can help enhance our deliberations about public policy in morally pluralistic societies. More specifically, I illustrate how the prescriptions of deliberative democracy can be applied to the issue of regulating non-medical uses of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), such as gender selection. Deliberative democracy does not aim to win a philosophical debate among rival first-order theories, such as libertarianism, egalitarianism or feminism. Rather, it advances a second-order analysis that strives to help us determine what would constitute a reasonable balance between the conflicting fundamental values that ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2234790</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2234790</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Children, ADHD, and Citizenship.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2234788&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19251776%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Cohen EF, Morley CP
    The diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder is a subject of controversy, for a host of reasons. This paper seeks to explore the manner in which children's interests may be subsumed to those of parents, teachers, and society as a whole in the course of diagnosis, treatment, and labeling, utilizing a framework for children's citizenship proposed by Elizabeth Cohen. Additionally, the paper explores aspects of discipline associated with the diagnosis, as well as distributional pathologies resulting from the application of the diagnosis in potentially biased ways.
    PMID: 19251776 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2234788</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2234788</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tinkering with the Survival Lottery during a Public Health Crisis.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2223962&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19246352%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Herrera C
    A well-known thought experiment has us ponder a lottery system that selects one person as the source of transplantable organs for two others. The organs are forcibly harvested and the &quot;donor&quot; dies, whereas the other two patients live. The Survival Lottery is supposed to get at the distinction between killing and letting die, but it is also a challenge to beliefs about moral duties: what are my obligations if my life could be used to save yours and another person's as well? A less extreme version of this thought experiment might have us imagining that officials of the public healthcare system would devise a similar lottery in the aftermath of a large-scale medical emergency. We could imagine that a natural disaster or an attack using biological weapons, for example, h...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2223962</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2223962</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Egalitarianism and Responsibility in the Genetic Future.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2223961&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19246353%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Barclay L
    Recent discussions of genetic enhancement have argued that unregulated access to genetic enhancement technology will have a mainly negative impact on equality, a development that an egalitarian approach to distributive justice should be concerned with and seek to address. I argue that the extent to which egalitarians should be concerned about unequal access to genetic enhancement therapies has been overplayed. Many of the genetic differences that exist between people, including those that arise from differential access to genetic enhancement technology, are simply irrelevant to egalitarian concerns. I also argue that most commentators have failed to appreciate that an egalitarian-inspired program of equal access to genetic enhancement technology may not be altogether...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2223961</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2223961</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Therapeutic Cloning and Reproductive Liberty.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2218044&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19240247%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Sparrow R
    Concern for &quot;reproductive liberty&quot; suggests that decisions about embryos should normally be made by the persons who would be the genetic parents of the child that would be brought into existence if the embryo were brought to term. Therapeutic cloning would involve creating and destroying an embryo, which, if brought to term, would be the offspring of the genetic parents of the person undergoing therapy. I argue that central arguments in debates about parenthood and genetics therefore suggest that therapeutic cloning would be prima facie unethical unless it occurred with the consent of the parents of the person being cloned. Alternatively, if therapeutic cloning is thought to be legitimate, this undermines the case for some uses of reproductive cloning by implying tha...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2218044</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2218044</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>From a Genetic Predisposition to an Interactive Predisposition: Rethinking the Ethical Implications of Screening for Gene-Environment Interactions.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2164291&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19193693%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Tabery J
    In a widely acclaimed study from 2002, researchers found a case of gene-environment interaction for a gene controlling neuroenzymatic activity (low vs. high), exposure to childhood maltreatment, and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD). Cases of gene-environment interaction are generally characterized as evincing a genetic predisposition; for example, individuals with low neuroenzymatic activity are generally characterized as having a genetic predisposition to ASPD. I first argue that the concept of a genetic predisposition fundamentally misconstrues these cases of gene-environment interaction. This misconstrual will be diagnosed, and then a new concept-interactive predisposition-will be introduced. I then show how this conceptual shift reconfigures old questions an...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2164291</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2164291</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Brain Damage and the Moral Significance of Consciousness.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2164290&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19193694%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Savulescu J, Kahane G
    Neuroimaging studies of brain-damaged patients diagnosed as in the vegetative state suggest that the patients might be conscious. This might seem to raise no new ethical questions given that in related disputes both sides agree that evidence for consciousness gives strong reason to preserve life. We question this assumption. We clarify the widely held but obscure principle that consciousness is morally significant. It is hard to apply this principle to difficult cases given that philosophers of mind distinguish between a range of notions of consciousness and that is unclear which of these is assumed by the principle. We suggest that the morally relevant notion is that of phenomenal consciousness and then use our analysis to interpret cases of brain damage...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2164290</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2164290</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Payments to Normal Healthy Volunteers in Phase 1 Trials: Avoiding Undue Influence While Distributing Fairly the Burdens of Research Participation.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2164292&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19190076%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Iltis AS
    Clinical investigators must engage in just subject recruitment and selection and avoid unduly influencing research participation. There may be tension between the practice of keeping payments to participants low to avoid undue influence and the requirements of justice when recruiting normal healthy volunteers for phase 1 drug studies. By intentionally keeping payments low to avoid unduly influenced participation, investigators, on the recommendation or insistence of institutional review boards, may be targeting or systematically recruiting healthy adult members of lower socio-economic groups for participation in phase 1 studies. Investigators are at risk of routinely failing to fulfill the obligation of justice, which prohibits the systematic targeting and recruiting ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2164292</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2164292</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Theoretical and Practical Issues in the Definition of Health: Insights from Aboriginal Australia.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2157470&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19181891%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Boddington P, R&amp;#xE4;is&amp;#xE4;nen U
    This paper discusses attempts to define health within a public policy arena and practical and conceptual difficulties that arise. An Australian Aboriginal definition of health is examined. Although there are certain difficulties of translation, this definition is prominent in current Australian health policy and discourse about health. The definition can be seen as broadly holistic in comparison to other holistic definitions such as that of the World Health Organization. The nature of this holism and its grounding within the context of Aboriginal Australia is discussed. In particular, its implications for the phenomenon of medicalization, which may be associated with a holistic notion of health, is critically explored, as is the link of notio...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2157470</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2157470</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tracking the Variability of Authority and Power in the Physician-Patient Relationship.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2149990&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19179459%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: McCullough LB
    
    PMID: 19179459 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2149990</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2149990</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>&quot;How Are We Defining Our Terms Here?&quot;: The Defining the Semantic Meaning of Terms in Bioethical Debates.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2112701&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19147794%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Hinkley AE
    
    PMID: 19147794 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2112701</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2112701</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Defining Analysis of the Life and Death Dyad: Paving the Way for an Ethical Debate.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2068117&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19109529%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Boniolo G, Paolo Di Fiore P
    We discuss the meaning of &quot;being alive&quot; and &quot;being dead.&quot; Our primary aim is to pave the way for a sound and accurate ethical debate concerning these two concepts. In particular, we analyze a metabolic approach and a genetic one and discuss the reasons for their failure to constitute a good starting point for successive debates. We argue that any ethical or social discussion of topics involving life and death must introduce cultural constructs such as, on the one hand, the concept of clinical death and, on the other hand, the concept of existence. We argue that these two cultural constructs, although consistent with biomedical knowledge, cannot be ontologically grounded in it. To conclude, we apply our findings to the case of human embryos.
    PMID...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2068117</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2068117</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medical Ethics Needs a New View of Autonomy.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2068116&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19109530%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Walker RL
    The notion of autonomy commonly employed in medical ethics literature and practices is inadequate on three fronts: it fails to properly identify nonautonomous actions and choices, it gives a false account of which features of actions and choices makes them autonomous or nonautonomous, and it provides no grounds for the moral requirement to respect autonomy. In this paper I offer a more adequate framework for how to think about autonomy, but this framework does not lend itself to the kinds of practical application assumed in medical ethics. A general problem then arises: the notion of autonomy used in medical ethics is conceptually inadequate, but conceptually adequate notions of autonomy do not have the practical applications that are the central concern of medical e...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2068116</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2068116</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Common Ground on Surgical Abortion?--Engaging Peter Singer on the Moral Status of Potential Persons.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2062458&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19098134%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Camosy CC
    The debate over surgical abortion is certainly one of the most divisive in ethical discourse and for many it seems interminable. However, this paper argues that a primary reason for this is confusion with regard to what issues are actually under dispute. When looking at an entrenched and articulate figure on one side of the debate, Peter Singer, and comparing his views with those of his opponents, one finds that the disputed issue is actually quite a narrow one: the moral status of potential persons. Finding this common ground clears the conceptual space for a fruitful argument: the thesis of which is that most, including Singer, who argue that potential persons do not have full personal moral status fail to make the necessary distinction between natural potential (w...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2062458</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2062458</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Biopolitics, Terri Schiavo, and the Sovereign Subject of Death.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2041431&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19074235%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Bishop JP
    Humanity does not gradually progress from combat to combat until it arrives at universal reciprocity, where the rule of law finally replaces warfare; humanity installs each of its violences in a system of rules and thus proceeds from domination to domination. (Foucault, 1984, 85) In this essay, I take a note from Michel Foucault regarding the notion of biopolitics. For Foucault, biopolitics has both repressive and constitutive properties. Foucault's claim is that with the rise of modern government, the state became exceedingly concerned about the body politic, the bodies that make up the polis, including the health of those bodies. However, Giorgio Agamben claims that Foucault and all western political philosophy misses the relationship between power and Sovereignty,...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2041431</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2041431</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Redefining Disability: Maleficent, Unjust and Inconsistent.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2041430&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D19074236%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Cox-White B, Boxall SF
    Disability activists' redefinition of &quot;disability&quot; as a social, rather than a medical, problem attempts to reassign causality. We explicate the untenable implications of this approach and argue this definition is maleficent, unjust, and inconsistent. Thus, redefining disability as a socially caused phenomenon is, from a moral point of view, ill-advised.
    PMID: 19074236 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2041430</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2041430</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>First do no harm: critical analyses of the roads to health care reform.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1863480&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18840849%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Iltis AS, Cherry MJ
    Health care reform poses numerous challenges. A core challenge is to make health care more efficient and effective without causing more harm than benefit. Additionally, those fashioning health-care policy must encourage patients to exercise caution and restraint when expending scarce resources; restrict the ability of politicians to advance their careers by promising alluring but costly entitlements, many of which they will not be able to deliver; face the demographic challenges of an aging population; and avoid regulations that create significant inefficiencies and restrict access to health care. Given such real-world challenges, how should health care be reformed in the United States or elsewhere? This number of The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy exam...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1863480</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1863480</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Public Health Insurance under a Nonbenevolent State.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1863479&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18840850%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Lemieux P
    This paper explores the consequences of the oft ignored fact that public health insurance must actually be supplied by the state. Depending how the state is modeled, different health insurance outcomes are expected. The benevolent model of the state does not account for many actual features of public health insurance systems. One alternative is to use a standard public choice model, where state action is determined by interaction between self-interested actors. Another alternative-related to a strand in public choice theory-is to model the state as Leviathan. Interestingly, some proponents of public health insurance use an implicit Leviathan model, but not consistently. The Leviathan model of the state explains many features of public health insurance: its uncontroll...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1863479</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1863479</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Patients, politics, and power: government failure and the politicization of u.k. Health care.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1863478&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18840851%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article examines the consequences of the politicization of health care in the United Kingdom following the creation of the National Health Service (NHS) in 1948. The NHS is founded on the principle of universal access to health care free at the point of use but in reality charges exist for some services and other services are rationed. Not to charge and/or ration would create a common-pool resource with no means of conserving scarce resources. Taking rationing decisions in the political realm means that the values and priorities of individual patients are marginalized and the preferences of powerful organized groups able to capture the political process dominate. The key lesson for international health care reform is that the politicization of health care via the NHS has not led to th...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1863478</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1863478</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Illusion of Legitimacy: Two Assumptions that Corrupt Health Policy Deliberation.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1863477&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18840852%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Trotter G
    Public deliberation about health policy in the United States often hinges on two untenable basic assumptions about political legitimacy. The first assumption, common in public debate throughout the United States, is that federal oversight of health care is justified under a federal compact binding all citizens. This assumption is false because the federal compact precludes such oversight. Indeed, the ascendancy of national government (and demise of federalism) over the past 70 years was engineered through the subversion of the federal compact, creating an expansive legitimation gap. The second assumption-that political legitimacy can be established through appeals to expert consensus about fundamental conceptions of justice or human rights-is prevalent among bioethic...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1863477</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1863477</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Foundational ethics of the health care system: the moral and practical superiority of free market reforms.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1863476&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18840853%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Sade RM
    Proposed solutions to the problems of this country's health care system range along a spectrum from central planning to free market. Central planners and free market advocates provide various ethical justifications for the policies they propose. The crucial flaw in the philosophical rationale of central planning is failure to distinguish between normative and metanormative principles, which leads to mistaken understanding of the nature of rights. Natural rights, based on the principle of noninterference, provide the link between individual morality and social order. Free markets, the practical expression of natural rights, are uniquely capable of achieving the goals that central planners seek but find beyond their grasp. The history of this country's health care system...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1863476</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1863476</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Market incentives and health care reform.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1863475&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18840854%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Taylor JS
    It is generally agreed that the current methods of providing health care in the West need to be reformed. Such reforms must operate within the practical limitations to which any future system of health care will be subject. These limitations include an increase in the demand for costly end-of-life health care coupled with a reduction in the proportion of the population who are working taxpayers (and hence a reduction in the proportionate amount of health care funding that can be secured through taxation) and the fact that the imposition of bureaucratic regulations on health care systems is costly. Recognizing these limitations should naturally lead one to consider market-based reforms. Yet despite the practical impetus for such reforms, there is still widespread conc...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1863475</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1863475</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA and the Critical Path to Twenty-first-century Medicine.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1863474&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18840855%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Pitts PJ
    One of the most pressing issues that confronts the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is learning how to better address and assist in medical product development. FDA needs to prepare today so the agency can efficiently evaluate the technologies of tomorrow. Clearly, this is an area that impacts not only health care consumers but also our economies and financial markets. If the FDA can be a more aggressive part of the solution, they can help not only ease some of the pressures that are driving up health care costs but also help all of us to maximize the value of medical innovations. The high cost of research and development is forcing many companies to make the short-term business decision to focus product development on those molecules that have a much higher potenti...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1863474</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1863474</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Should we be alarmed by medical research?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1863473&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18840856%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Bogardus T
    
    PMID: 18840856 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1863473</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1863473</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy is a nonthematic issue. Introduction.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1669075&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18662946%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Phillips HA
    
    PMID: 18662946 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1669075</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:22:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1669075</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Introduction.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1665333&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18662946%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Phillips HA
    
    PMID: 18662946 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1665333</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:37:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1665333</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Epistemic trust, epistemic responsibility, and medical practice.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1665332&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18662947%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Schwab AP
    Epistemic trust is an unacknowledged feature of medical knowledge. Claims of medical knowledge made by physicians, patients, and others require epistemic trust. And yet, it would be foolish to define all epistemic trust as epistemically responsible. Accordingly, I use a routine example in medical practice (a diagnostic test) to illustrate how epistemically responsible trust in medicine is trust in epistemically responsible individuals. I go on to illustrate how certain areas of current medical practice of medicine fall short of adequately distinguishing reliable and unreliable processes because of a failure to systematically evaluate health outcomes. I conclude by articulating the devastating obstacles to the consilience assumption, which takes intellectual character...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1665332</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:37:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1665332</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Kant and therapeutic privilege.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1665331&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18662948%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Brown C
    Given Kant's exceptionless moral prohibition on lying, one might suspect that he is committed to a similar prohibition on withholding diagnostic and prognostic information from patients. I confirm this suspicion by adapting arguments against therapeutic privilege from his arguments against lying. However, I show that all these arguments are importantly flawed and submit that they should be rejected. A more compelling Kantian take on informed consent and therapeutic privilege is achievable, I argue, by focusing on Kant's duty of beneficence, which requires us to aim at furthering others' ends. But I show that there are some cases in which furthering a patient's ends requires withholding material medical information from her. Although I concede that these cases are proba...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1665331</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:37:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1665331</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Paternalism, consent, and the use of experimental drugs in the military.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1665330&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18662949%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Wolfendale J, Clarke S
    Modern military organizations are paternalistic organizations. They typically recognize a duty of care toward military personnel and are willing to ignore or violate the consent of military personnel in order to uphold that duty of care. In this paper, we consider the case for paternalism in the military and distinguish it from the case for paternalism in medicine. We argue that one can consistently reject paternalism in medicine but uphold paternalism in the military. We consider two well-known arguments for the conclusion that military organizations should not be entitled to use experimental drugs on troops without first obtaining the informed consent of those troops. We argue that both of these are unsuccessful, in the absence of an argument for the r...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1665330</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:37:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1665330</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Futility, conscientious refusal, and who gets to decide.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1665329&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18662950%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Davis JK
    Most discussions of medical futility try to answer the Futility Question: when is a medical procedure futile? No answer enjoys universal support. Some futility policies say that the health care provider will answer this question when the provider and patient (or surrogate decisionmaker) cannot agree. This raises the Decision Question: who has the moral authority to decide what to do in cases where futility is disputed? I look for a procedural answer to this question, an answer that does not turn on whether a given party happens to answer the Futility Question correctly. I argue that these policies get it right; the provider should decide because providers have a right of conscientious refusal that extends to refusing procedures on grounds of futility. This is a proced...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1665329</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:37:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1665329</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Protecting the right of informed conscience in reproductive medicine.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1665328&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18662951%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Mirkes R
    This essay sets down three directives for conscientiously objecting clinicians-physicians, particularly obstetrician/gynecologists, trained in NaProTechnology by the Pope Paul VI Institute and Creighton University School of Medicine and any medical professionals who share their natural law vision of reproductive health care-to protect their right to well-formed conscientious objection in reproductive medicine. Directive one: understand the nature of a well-formed conscience and its rightful exercise. Directive two: fulfill all reasonable American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' requirements for conscientious refusal. Directive three: execute a political strategy to protect health-care conscience rights.
    PMID: 18662951 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1665328</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:37:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1665328</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The vagueness of &quot;tradition&quot; and the pain and suffering of children.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1665327&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18662952%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Putman D
    The argument presented by Jeffrey Bishop that &quot;tradition&quot; justifies female circumcision is grounded on the assumption that reason is always situated within traditions and that traditions are the foundational source of values. I argue that the concept of tradition is inherently vague and, as such, cannot support the weight of the argument that makes it the final arbiter of moral values. The concept especially does not justify intense pain and suffering inflicted on children.
    PMID: 18662952 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1665327</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:37:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1665327</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Individual responsibility and solidarity in European health care: further down the road to two-tier system of health care.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1544893&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18567902%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Ter Meulen R, Jotterand F
    
    PMID: 18567902 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1544893</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1544893</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bonuses as incentives and rewards for health responsibility: a good thing?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1544892&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18567903%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Schmidt H
    Bonuses, as incentives or rewards for health-related behavior, feature prominently in German social health insurance. Their goal is centered around promoting personal responsibility, but reducing overall health-care expenditure and enabling competition between sickness funds also play a role. The central position of personal responsibility in German health-care policy is described, and a framework is offered for an analysis of the ethical issues raised by policies seeking to promote responsibility. The framework entails seven tests relating to: solidarity; equality and equity; intrusiveness; attributability and opportunity of choice; evidence, rationale, and feasibility; affected third parties; and coherence. It is contended that a focus on tests, in particular from ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1544892</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1544892</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Organizational Reform and Health-care Goods: Concerns about Marketization in the UK NHS.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1544891&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18567904%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Cribb A
    This paper uses the recent history of marketization and privatization in the UK National Health Service as a case study through which to explore the relationship between health-care organization and health-care goods. Phases and processes of marketization are briefly reviewed in order to show that, although the scope of both marketization and privatization reforms have, until recently, been very heavily circumscribed (and can only be understood in the context of the rise of managerialism), they have nonetheless had a major impact on the &quot;value field&quot; of UK health services. The second half of the paper draws upon the concerns of the critics of market-style reforms to set out and explore the ways in which organizational reform and the shifts in institutional norms conseq...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1544891</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1544891</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Market reforms in Swedish health care: normative reorientation and welfare state sustainability.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1544890&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18567905%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Bergmark A
    Although the impact of market reforms in Swedish health care stands out as not very far-reaching in an international comparison, it represents a route away from the features and basic values normally associated with the Swedish or Scandinavian model. Summarizing the development over the last decades, we may identify signs of sustainability as well as change. Popular support for public provision and a robust institutional structure make far-reaching alterations of existing structures less feasible, although most visible changes this far-incremental though they may be-represent a change in which the normative foundations of the Swedish model are challenged.
    PMID: 18567905 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1544890</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1544890</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Increasing individual responsibility in dutch health care: is solidarity losing ground?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1544889&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18567906%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article presents various developments in Dutch health care policy toward a greater role for individual financial responsibility, such as cost-control measures, priority setting, rationing, and market reform. Instead of the collective responsibility that is characteristic of previous times, one can observe in government policies an increased emphasis on the need for individuals to take care of one's own health and health care needs. Moreover, surveys point to decreasing levels of public support for &quot;unlimited&quot; solidarity and &quot;irresponsible&quot; health behavior. This article attempts to answer the question of how these policies and public attitudes are limiting the ethical principles of solidarity and equal access to care that have long guided Dutch health care policy making. The authors ar...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1544889</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1544889</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Europe and the United States: contrast and convergence.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1544888&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18567907%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article offers some speculation about their gradual convergence in the years ahead.
    PMID: 18567907 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1544888</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1544888</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Metaphysical problems in the philosophy of medicine and bioethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520225&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18480496%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Hinkley AE
    
    PMID: 18480496 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520225</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520225</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The prototype resemblance theory of disease.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520224&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18480497%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Sadegh-Zadeh K
    In a previous paper the concept of disease was fuzzy-logically analyzed and a sketch was given of a prototype resemblance theory of disease (Sadegh-Zadeh (2000). J. Med. Philos., 25:605-38). This theory is outlined in the present paper. It demonstrates what it means to say that the concept of disease is a nonclassical one and, therefore, not amenable to traditional methods of inquiry. The theory undertakes a reconstruction of disease as a category that in contradistinction to traditional views is not based on a set of common features of its members, that is individual diseases, but on a few best examples of the category, called its prototypes, and a similarity relationship such that a human condition is considered a disease if it resembles a prototype. It enable...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520224</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520224</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Four queries concerning the metaphysics of early human embryogenesis.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520223&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18480498%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Howsepian AA
    In this essay, I attempt to provide answers to the following four queries concerning the metaphysics of early human embryogenesis. (1) Following its first cellular fission, is it coherent to claim that one and only one of two &quot;blastomeric&quot; twins of a human zygote is identical with that zygote? (2) Following the fusion of two human pre-embryos, is it coherent to claim that one and only one pre-fusion pre-embryo is identical with that postfusion pre-embryo? (3) Does a live human being come into existence only when its brain comes into existence? (4) At implantation, does a pre-embryo become a mere part of its mother? I argue that either if things have quidditative properties or if criterialism is false, then queries (1) and (2) can be answered in the affirmative; th...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520223</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520223</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Treating humanity as an inviolable end: an analysis of contraception and altered nuclear transfer.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520222&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18480499%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Masek L
    I argue that contraception is morally wrong but that periodic abstinence (or natural family planning) is not. Further, I argue that altered nuclear transfer-a proposed technique for creating human stem cells without destroying human embryos-is morally wrong for the same reason that contraception is. Contrary to what readers might expect, my argument assumes nothing about the morality of cloning or abortion and requires no premises about God or natural teleology. Instead, I argue that contraception and altered nuclear transfer are morally wrong because they fail to treat humanity as an inviolable end.
    PMID: 18480499 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520222</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520222</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The beginning of individual human personhood.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520221&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18480500%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Penner PS, Hull RT
    Even for persons who hold to the ethical acceptance of abortion practices in general, questions of detail often arise. If you assume the distinction between the physical human organism alone and the person that is associated with that organism, then you must face the question of whether it is permissible to abort a fetus if the corresponding person has come into being. We take the position that the abortion of a fetus that has achieved this level of development should be declared unethical except in special circumstances. Our purpose here is to identify the point in the development of the fetus that serves as the marker for this level.
    PMID: 18480500 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520221</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520221</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Colonizing bioethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520220&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18480501%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Iltis A
    
    PMID: 18480501 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520220</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520220</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rethinking the conceptual and empirical foundations of clinical ethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520231&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18420547%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: McCullough LB
    The five papers in the 2008 &quot;Clinical Ethics&quot; number of the journal address the conceptual and empirical foundations of clinical ethics. Three articles take up the concept of professionalism in medicine, exploring its possibilities and implications. The fourth article provides a distinctive, phenomenological account of the &quot;placebo effect,&quot; a vexing topic of surprising durability in the clinical setting. The final article, a systematic review of the qualitative literature on bedside rationing of resources, creates an empirical foundation for philosophical analysis and argument of a distinctive kind.
    PMID: 18420547 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520231</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520231</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Professionalism's facets: ambiguity, ambivalence, and nostalgia.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520230&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18420548%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Erde EL
    Medical educators invoke professionalism as a core competency in curricula. This paper criticizes classic definitions. It also identifies some negative traits of medicine as a profession. The call to professionalism is naive nostalgia. Straightforward didactics in professionalism cannot do the desired work in medical education. The most we can say is that students should adopt the good aspects of professionalism and the profession should stop being some of what it has been. This is a platitude. If the notion is to be more than shallow, each student and practitioner will have to engage in much dialogue, reflection and refinement over many years.
    PMID: 18420548 [PubMed - in process] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520230</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520230</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Moral damage to health care professionals and trainees: legalism and other consequences for patients and colleagues.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520229&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18420549%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Rentmeester CA
    Health care professionals' and trainees' conceptions of their responsibilities to patients can change over time for a number of reasons: evolving career goals, desires to serve different patient populations, and changing family obligations, for example. Some changes in conceptions of responsibility are healthy, but others express moral damage. Clinicians' changes in their conceptions of what they are responsible for express moral damage when their responses to others express a meager, rather than robust, sense of what they owe others. At least two important expressions of moral damage in the context of health care are these: callousness and divestiture. Callousness describes the poor condition of a clinician's capacity for moral perception; when her capacity to ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520229</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520229</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>An analysis of candidate ethical justifications for allowing inexperienced physicians-in-training to perform invasive procedures.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520228&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18420550%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Mercurio MR
    Allowing relatively inexperienced physicians-in-training to perform invasive medical procedures is a widely accepted practice, generally felt to be justified by the need to train future generations of physicians. The ethical justification of this practice, however, is rarely if ever explored in any depth. This essay examines the moral issues associated with this practice, in the setting of a specific clinical scenario involving the emergency intubation of a critically ill newborn. The practice is ultimately shown to be justified based not only on the needs of society and future patients but also on the best interests of the patient being treated. However, several important qualifications need to be satisfied in order for this practice to be ethically permissible. T...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520228</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520228</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A phenomenology of the 'placebo effect': taking meaning from the mind to the body.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520227&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18420551%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Frenkel O
    Most mainstream attempts to understand the &quot;placebo effect&quot; invoke expectancy theory, arguing that expecting certain outcomes from a treatment or intervention can manifest those outcomes. Expectancy theory is incompatible with the phenomena of placebo responses, more appropriately named &quot;meaning responses.&quot; The expectancy account utilizes reflexive consciousness to connect a world of conceptual representations to mechanical physiology. An alternative account based upon Merleau-Ponty's motor intentionality argues that the body understands and is capable of responding to meanings without the need for any conceptual or linguistic content. A motor intentional framework of meaning poses dramatic implications for the interpretation of clinical trials and in the clinical pr...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520227</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520227</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How physicians allocate scarce resources at the bedside: a systematic review of qualitative studies.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520226&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18420552%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Strech D, Synofzik M, Marckmann G
    Although rationing of scarce health-care resources is inevitable in clinical practice, there is still limited and scattered information about how physicians perceive and execute this bedside rationing (BSR) and how it can be performed in an ethically fair way. This review gives a systematic overview on physicians' perspectives on influences, strategies, and consequences of health-care rationing. Relevant references as identified by systematically screening major electronic databases and manuscript references were synthesized by thematic analysis. Retrieved studies focused on themes that fell under three major headings: (i) conditions and influences of BSR, (ii) strategies of BSR, and (iii) consequences of BSR. The range of themes indicates tha...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520226</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520226</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>On a bioethical challenge to disability rights.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520236&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18027248%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Amundson R, Tresky S
    Tensions exist between the disability rights movement and the work of many bioethicists. These reveal themselves in a major recent book on bioethics and genetics, From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice. This book defends certain genetic policies against criticisms from disability rights advocates, in part by arguing that it is possible to accept both the genetic policies and the rights of people with impairments. However, a close reading of the book reveals a series of direct moral criticisms of the disability rights movement. The criticisms go beyond a defense of genetic policies from the criticisms of disability rights advocates. The disability rights movement is said not to have the same moral legitimacy as other civil rights movements, such as tho...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520236</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520236</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Can it be a good thing to be deaf?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520235&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18027249%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Cooper R
    Increasingly, Deaf activists claim that it can be good to be Deaf. Still, much of the hearing world remains unconvinced, and continues to think of deafness in negative terms. I examine this debate and argue that to determine whether it can be good to be deaf it is necessary to examine each claimed advantage or disadvantage of being deaf, and then to make an overall judgment regarding the net cost or benefit. On the basis of such a survey I conclude that being deaf may plausibly be a good thing for some deaf people but not for others.
    PMID: 18027249 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520235</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520235</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The potential of the human embryo.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520234&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18027250%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Brown MT
    A higher order potential analysis of moral status clarifies the issues that divide Human Being Theorists who oppose embryo research from Person Theorists who favor embryo research. Higher order potential personhood is transitive if it is active, identity preserving and morally relevant. If the transition from the Second Order Potential of the embryo to the First Order Potential of an infant is transitive, opponents of embryo research make a powerful case for the moral status of the embryo. If it is intransitive, then the Person Theorist can draw lines between levels of moral status that permit embryo research to proceed.
    PMID: 18027250 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520234</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520234</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Disability, humanity, and personhood: a survey of moral concepts.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520233&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18027251%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Ralston DC, Ho J
    Three of the articles included in this issue of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy - Ron Amundson and Shari Tresky's &quot;On a Bioethical Challenge to Disability Rights&quot;; Rachel Cooper's &quot;Can It Be a Good Thing to Be Deaf?&quot;; and Mark T. Brown's &quot;The Potential of the Human Embryo&quot; - interact (in various ways) with the concepts of disability, humanity, and personhood and their normative dimensions. As one peruses these articles, it becomes apparent that terms like &quot;disability,&quot; &quot;human being,&quot; and &quot;person&quot; carry with them great normative significance. There is, however, much disagreement concerning both the definition and the extension of such terms. This is significant because different terms and definitions are associated with different sets of normative requir...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520233</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520233</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Defensive medicine or economically motivated corruption? A confucian reflection on physician care in China today.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520232&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D18027252%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Chen XY
    In contemporary China, physicians tend to require more diagnostic work-ups and prescribe more expensive medications than are clearly medically indicated. These practices have been interpreted as defensive medicine in response to a rising threat of potential medical malpractice lawsuits. After outlining recent changes in Chinese malpractice law, this essay contends that the overuse of expensive diagnostic and therapeutic interventions cannot be attributed to malpractice concerns alone. These practice patterns are due as well, if not primarily, to the corruption of medical decision-making by physicians being motivated to earn supplementary income, given the constraints of an ill-structured governmental policy by the over-use of expensive diagnostic and therapeutic interv...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520232</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520232</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Long-term care: dignity, autonomy, family integrity, and social sustainability: the Hong Kong experience.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520243&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17924269%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article reveals the outcome of a study on the perceptions of elders, family members, and healthcare professionals and administration providing care in a range of different long-term care facilities in Hong Kong with primary focus on the concepts of autonomy and dignity of elders, quality and location of care, decision making, and financing of long term care. It was found that aging in place and family care were considered the best approaches to long term care insofar as procuring and balancing the values of dignity, autonomy, family integrity and social sustainability were concerned. An elder having the final say was generally accepted. The results also initiated the importance of sharing of financial responsibility among elders, children and government albeit the emphasis was placed ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520243</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520243</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Perceptions of long-term care, autonomy, and dignity, by residents, family and caregivers: the Beijing experience.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520242&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17924270%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article documents the results of a study on the perceptions of long-term elder care in Beijing in the People's Republic of China by those most intimately involved. The study asked a sample of elderly, family members, and health care professionals, all of whom are involved in care at a variety of long-term care facilities in Beijing, about their perceptions of the care given at these facilities from their particular standpoints as regards issues such as the quality and ideal location of care, decision-making regarding the care receiving, who should be responsible for the financing of care, and the meaning of dignity for the elderly in these facilities. The results showed adherence to traditional family values at least on one level regarding the ideal location of care being with the fam...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520242</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520242</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Perceptions of long-term care, autonomy, and dignity, by residents, family and care-givers: the Houston experience.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520241&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17924271%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Boisaubin EV, Chu A, Catalano JM
    Houston, Texas, is a major U.S. city with, like many, a growing aging population. The purpose of this study and ultimate book chapter is to explore the views and perceptions of long-term care (LTC) residents, family members and health care providers. Individuals primarily in independent living and group residential settings were interviewed and studied. Questions emphasized the concepts of personal autonomy, dignity, quality and location of care and decision making. Although a small sample of participants were involved, consistency was noted. Keeping the elderly in caring and loving home situations (theirs or family) was most preferred. Personal choice and independence were emphasized by residents, but family members needed to act as advocates....</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520241</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520241</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Dignity in long-term care for older persons: a Confucian perspective.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520240&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17924272%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article presents Mencius' concept of human dignity in the Chinese Confucian moral tradition, focused on the context of long-term care. The double nature of Mencius' notion of human dignity as an intrinsic quality of human beings qua being human is analyzed and contrasted with the dominant Western account of human dignity as grounded in personhood. Drawing on the heuristic force of an interview with an elder person in Hong Kong, the insights of the Mencian theory of human dignity are used to provide a moral foundation for long-term care for elder persons in a context of diminishing personhood and shrinking autonomy.
    PMID: 17924272 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520240</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520240</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Reflections on the function of dignity in the context of caring for old people.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520239&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17924273%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article accepts the proposition that old people want to be treated with dignity and that statements about dignity point to ethical duties that, if not independent of rights, at least enhance rights in ethically important ways. In contexts of policy and law, dignity can certainly have a substantive as well as rhetorical function. However, the article questions whether the concept of dignity can provide practical guidance for choosing among alternative approaches to the care of old people. The article explores the paradoxical relationship between the apparent lack of specific content in many conceptions of dignity and the broad utility that dignity appears to have as a concept expressive of shared social understandings about the status of old people.
    PMID: 17924273 [PubMed - indexed...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520239</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520239</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Which care? Whose responsibility? And why family? A Confucian account of long-term care for the elderly.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520238&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17924274%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Fan R
    Across the world, socio-economic forces are shifting the locus of long-term care from the family to institutional settings, producing significant moral, not just financial costs. This essay explores these costs and the distortions in the role of the family they involve. These reflections offer grounds for critically questioning the extent to which moral concerns regarding long-term care in Hong Kong and in mainland China are the same as those voiced in the United States, although family resemblances surely exist. Chinese moral values such as virtue and filial piety embedded in a Confucian moral and social context cannot be recast without distortion in terms of modern Western European notions. The essay concludes that the Confucian resources must be taken seriously in ord...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520238</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520238</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Long-term care: the family, post-modernity, and conflicting moral life-worlds.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520237&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17924275%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Engelhardt HT
    Long-term care is controversial because it involves foundational disputes. Some are moral-economic, bearing on whether the individual, the family, or the state is primarily responsible for long-term care, as well as on how one can establish a morally and financially sustainable long-term-care policy, given the moral hazard of people over-using entitlements once established, the political hazard of media democracies promising unfundable entitlements, the demographic hazard of relatively fewer workers to support those in need of long-term care, the moral hazard to responsibility of shifting accountability to third parties, and the bureaucratic hazard of moving from individual and family choice to bureaucratic oversight. These disputes are compounded by controversie...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520237</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520237</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The well-being of subjects and other parties in genetic research and testing.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520248&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17712705%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Malek J, Kopelman LM
    
    PMID: 17712705 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520248</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520248</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Grappling with groups: protecting collective interests in biomedical research.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520247&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17712706%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Sharp RR, Foster MW
    Strategies for protecting historically disadvantaged groups have been extensively debated in the context of genetic variation research, making this a useful starting point in examining the protection of social groups from harm resulting from biomedical research. We analyze research practices developed in response to concerns about the involvement of indigenous communities in studies of genetic variation and consider their potential application in other contexts. We highlight several conceptual ambiguities and practical challenges associated with the protection of group interests and argue that protectionist strategies developed in the context of genetic research will not be easily adapted to other types of research in which social groups are placed at risk....</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520247</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520247</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Understanding risks and benefits in research on reproductive genetic technologies.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520246&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17712707%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article explores three characteristics of research on reproductive genetic technologies that complicate the assessment of the risk-benefit ratio for such research. First, a number of different people may be affected by a research protocol, raising the question of who should be considered to be the subject of reproductive genetic research. Second, such research could involve a wide range of possible harms and benefits, making the evaluation and comparison of those harms and benefits a challenging task. Finally, the risk-benefit ratio for this type of research is difficult to estimate because such research can have unpredictable, long-term implications. The article aims to facilitate the assessment of risk-benefit ratios in research on reproductive genetic technologies by proposing and ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520246</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520246</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The changing face of &quot;misidentified paternity&quot;.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520245&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17712708%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Davis DS
    Advances in genetic research and technology can have a profound impact on identity and family dynamics when genetic findings disrupt deeply held assumptions about the nuclear family. Ancestry tracing and paternity testing present parallel risks and opportunities. As these latter uses are now available over the internet directly to the consumer, bypassing the genetic counselor, consumers need adequate warning when making use of these new modalities.
    PMID: 17712708 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520245</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520245</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Using the Best Interests Standard to decide whether to test children for untreatable, late-onset genetic diseases.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520244&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17712709%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Kopelman LM
    A new analysis of the Best Interests Standard is given and applied to the controversy about testing children for untreatable, severe late-onset genetic diseases, such as Huntington's disease or Alzheimer's disease. A professional consensus recommends against such predictive testing, because it is not in children's best interest. Critics disagree. The Best Interests Standard can be a powerful way to resolve such disputes. This paper begins by analyzing its meaning into three necessary and jointly sufficient conditions showing it: 1. is an &quot;umbrella&quot; standard, used differently in different contexts, 2. has objective and subjective features, 3. is more than people's intuitions about how to rank potential benefits and risks in deciding for others but also includes evid...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520244</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520244</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The ethics of NBIC convergence.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520255&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17613701%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Khushf G
    
    PMID: 17613701 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520255</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520255</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Converging technologies and human destiny.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520254&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17613702%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article considers the uneasy relations between science and religion, in the context of fertility decline, and the prospects for developing a new and self-sustaining civilization based in a broad convergence of science and technology, coalescing around a core of nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, and cognitive technologies. It concludes with the suggestion that the new civilization should become interstellar.
    PMID: 17613702 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520254</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520254</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Knots and strands: an argument for productive disillusionment.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520253&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17613703%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article offers a contrast between European and US-American approaches to the convergence of enabling technologies and to associated issues. It identifies an apparently paradoxical situation in which regional differences produce conflicting claims to universality, each telling us what can and will happen to the benefit of humanity. Those who might mediate and negotiate these competing claims are themselves entangled in the various positions. A possible solution is offered, namely a universalizable strategy that aims to disentangle premature claims to unity and universality as in the case of the greater &quot;efficiency&quot; of nanomedicine. This is the strategy by which Science and Technologies Studies (STS) can analytically tease apart what it has helped produce and sustain in the first place....</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520253</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520253</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Some pitfalls in the philosophical foundations of nanoethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520252&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17613704%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Dupuy JP
    If such a thing as nanoethics is possible, it can only develop by confronting the great questions of moral philosophy, thus avoiding the pitfalls so common to regional ethics. We identify and analyze some of these pitfalls: the restriction of ethics to prudence understood as rational risk management; the reduction of ethics to cost/benefit analysis; the confusion of technique with technology and of human nature with the human condition. Once these points have been clarified, it is possible to take up some weighty philosophical and metaphysical questions which are not new, but which need to be raised anew with respect to nanotechnologies: the artificialization of nature; the question of limits; the role of religion; the finiteness of the human condition as something wi...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520252</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520252</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Re-inventing ourselves: the plasticity of embodiment, sensing, and mind.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520251&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17613705%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Clark A
    Recent advances in cognitive science and cognitive neuroscience open up new vistas for human enhancement. Central to much of this work is the idea of new human-machine interfaces (in general) and new brain-machine interfaces (in particular). But despite the increasing prominence of such ideas, the very idea of such an interface remains surprisingly under-explored. In particular, the notion of human enhancement suggests an image of the embodied and reasoning agent as literally extended or augmented, rather than the more conservative image of a standard (non-enhanced) agent using a tool via some new interface. In this essay, I explore this difference, and attempt to lay out some of the conditions under which the more radical reading (positing brand new integrated agents ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520251</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520251</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Nano-technology and privacy: on continuous surveillance outside the panopticon.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520250&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17613706%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Hoven JV, Vermaas PE
    We argue that nano-technology in the form of invisible tags, sensors, and Radio Frequency Identity Chips (RFIDs) will give rise to privacy issues that are in two ways different from the traditional privacy issues of the last decades. One, they will not exclusively revolve around the idea of centralization of surveillance and concentration of power, as the metaphor of the Panopticon suggests, but will be about constant observation at decentralized levels. Two, privacy concerns may not exclusively be about constraining information flows but also about designing of materials and nano-artifacts such as chips and tags. We begin by presenting a framework for structuring the current debates on privacy, and then present our arguments.
    PMID: 17613706 [PubMed - ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520250</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520250</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Open questions in the ethics of convergence.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520249&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17613707%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Khushf G
    After historically situating NBIC Convergence in the context of earlier bioethical debate on genetics, ten questions are raised in areas related to the ethics of Convergence, indicating where future research is needed.
    PMID: 17613707 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520249</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520249</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Articulating and responding to uncertainties in clinical research.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520261&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17454416%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Djulbegovic B
    This paper introduces taxonomy of clinical uncertaintes and argues that the choice of scientific method should match the underlying level of uncertainty. Clinical trial is one of these methods aiming to resolve clinical uncertainties. Whenever possible these uncertainties should be quantified. The paper further shows that the still ongoing debate about the usage of &quot;equipoise&quot; vs. &quot;uncertainty principle&quot; vs. &quot;indifference&quot; as an entry criterion to clinical trials actually refers to the question &quot;whose uncertainty counts&quot;. This question is intimately linked to the control of research agenda, which is not quantifiable and hence is not solvable to equal acceptability to all interested parties. The author finally shows that there is a predictable relation between [ac...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520261</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520261</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Two dogmas of research ethics and the integrative approach to human-subjects research.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520260&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17454417%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article argues that lingering uncertainty about the normative foundations of research ethics is perpetuated by two unfounded dogmas of research ethics. The first dogma is that clinical research, as a social activity, is an inherently utilitarian endeavor. The second dogma is that an acceptable framework for research ethics must impose constraints on this endeavor whose moral force is grounded in role-related obligations of either physicians or researchers. This article argues that these dogmas are common to traditional articulations of the equipoise requirement and to recently articulated alternatives, such as the non-exploitation approach. Moreover, important shortcomings of these approaches can be traced to their acceptance of these dogmas. After highlighting these shortcomings, thi...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520260</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520260</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Equipoise and the duty of care in clinical research: a philosophical response to our critics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520259&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17454418%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Miller PB, Weijer C
    Franklin G. Miller and colleagues have stimulated renewed interest in research ethics through their work criticizing clinical equipoise. Over three years and some twenty articles, they have also worked to articulate a positive alternative view on norms governing the conduct of clinical research. Shared presuppositions underlie the positive and critical dimensions of Miller and colleagues' work. However, recognizing that constructive contributions to the field ought to enjoy priority, we presently scrutinize the constructive dimension of their work. We argue that it is wanting in several respects.
    PMID: 17454418 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520259</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520259</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>So-called &quot;clinical equipoise&quot; and the argument from design.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520258&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17454419%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Gifford F
    In this article, I review and expand upon arguments showing that Freedman's so-called &quot;clinical equipoise&quot; criterion cannot serve as an appropriate guide and justification for the moral legitimacy of carrying out randomized clinical trials. At the same time, I try to explain why this approach has been given so much credence despite compelling arguments against it, including the fact that Freedman's original discussion framed the issues in a misleading way, making certain things invisible: Clinical equipoise is conflated with community equipoise, and several versions of each are also conflated. But a misleading impression is given that, rather than distinct criteria being arbitrarily conflated, a puzzle is solved and a number of features unified. Various issues are pu...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520258</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520258</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Clinical equipoise and the incoherence of research ethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520257&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17454420%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Miller FG, Brody H
    The doctrine of clinical equipoise is appealing because it appears to permit physicians to maintain their therapeutic obligation to offer optimal medical care to patients while conducting randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The appearance, however, is deceptive. In this article we argue that clinical equipoise is defective and incoherent in multiple ways. First, it conflates the sound methodological principle that RCTs should begin with an honest null hypothesis with the questionable ethical norm that participants in these trials should never be randomized to an intervention known to be inferior to standard treatment. Second, the claim that RCTs preserve the therapeutic obligation of physicians misrepresents the patient-centered orientation of medical care....</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520257</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520257</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The irrelevance of equipoise.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520256&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17454421%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article rejects that claim. It first asks for what one should be equally poised (scientific or clinical equipoise), then asks who should be equally poised (scientist, clinician, or subject), and finally asks why any of these players need be equally poised between treatment options. The article argues that only the subject's evaluation of the options is morally relevant and that even the subject need not be equally poised or indifferent between the options in order to volunteer for randomization. All that is needed is adequately informed, free, and unexploited consent. It concludes equipoise is irrelevant.
    PMID: 17454421 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520256</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520256</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Towards a professional ethics model of clinical ethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520266&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17365442%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: McCullough LB
    
    PMID: 17365442 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520266</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520266</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health versus harm: euthanasia and physicians' duties.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520265&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17365443%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Garcia JL
    This essay rebuts Gary Seay's efforts to show that committing euthanasia need not conflict with a physician's professional duties. First, I try to show how his misunderstanding of the correlativity of rights and duties and his discussion of the foundation of moral rights undermine his case. Second, I show aspects of physicians' professional duties that clash with euthanasia, and that attempts to avoid this clash lead to absurdities. For professional duties are best understood as deriving from professional virtues and the commitments and purposes with which the professional as such ought to act, and there is no plausible way in which her death can be seen as advancing the patient's medical welfare. Third, I argue against Prof. Seay's assumption that apparent conflicts...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520265</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520265</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Whoever could get rid of the context of discovery/context of justification dichotomy? A proposal based on recent developments in clinical research.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520264&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17365444%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: de Freitas RS, Pietrobon R
    In his Art and Illusion, art historian Ernst Gombrich argues that the emergence and development of styles of pictorial representation depend on the availability of certain schemata, which can be documented. He himself documents the schemata responsible for the emergence and development of several styles. Nothing of this kind has been done as far as the growth of scientific knowledge is concerned. In this article we discuss whether is it possible to document something analogous to Gombrich's schemata that can be of crucial relevance for the development of clinical research.
    PMID: 17365444 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520264</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520264</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Should a good healthcare professional be (at least a little) callous?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520263&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17365445%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Rentmeester CA
    The term &quot;callous&quot; has not, to this point, been studied empirically or considered philosophically in the context of healthcare professionalism. It should be, however, because its uses seem peculiar. Sometimes &quot;callous&quot; is used to suggest that becoming callous confers a benefit of some protection against emotional distress, which might be considered expedient in the healthcare work environment. But, &quot;callous&quot; also refers to a person's unappealing demeanor of hardened insensitivity. The tension between these different moral connotations of &quot;callous&quot; prompts several empirical, psychological, and moral questions; I introduce and entertain a few here. I also suggest a distinction between callousness and inurement and argue for why this distinction is important to app...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520263</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520263</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Constructing a systematic review for argument-based clinical ethics literature: the example of concealed medications.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520262&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17365446%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article inaugurates a new section of the annual &quot;Clinical Ethics&quot; issue of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy on systematic reviews. Using recently articulated standards for argument-based normative ethics, we provide a systematic review of the literature on concealed medication for the management of psychiatric disorders. Four steps are completed: identify a focused question; conduct a literature search using key terms relevant to the focused question; assess the adequacy of the argument-based methods of the papers identified; and identify conclusions drawn in each paper and whether they apply to the focused question. We identified seven papers and provide an assessment of them. While none of the papers fully meet the standards of argument-based ethics, they did provide rationale...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520262</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520262</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bioethics and politics: &quot;doing ethics&quot; in the public square.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520273&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17162728%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Pellegrino ED
    
    PMID: 17162728 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520273</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520273</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How philosophy of medicine has changed medical ethics.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520272&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17162729%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Veatch RM
    The celebration of thirty years of publication of The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy provides an opportunity to reflect on how medical ethics has evolved over that period. The reshaping of the field has occurred in no small part because of the impact of branches of philosophy other than ethics. These have included influences from Kantian theory of respect for persons, personal identity theory, philosophy of biology, linguistic analysis of the concepts of health and disease, personhood theory, epistemology, and political philosophy. More critically, medicine itself has begun to be reshaped. The most fundamental restructuring of medicine is currently occurring--stemming, in part, from the application of contemporary philosophy of science to the medical field. There...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520272</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520272</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bioethics as a second-order discipline: who is not a bioethicist?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520271&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17162730%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Kopelman LM
    A dispute exists about whether bioethics should become a new discipline with its own methods, competency standards, duties, honored texts, and core curriculum. Unique expertise is a necessary condition for disciplines. Using the current literature, different views about the sort of expertise that might be unique to bioethicists are critically examined to determine if there is an expertise that might meet this requirement. Candidates include analyses of expertise based in &quot;philosophical ethics,&quot; &quot;casuistry,&quot; &quot;atheoretical or situation ethics,&quot; &quot;conventionalist relativism,&quot; &quot;institutional guidance,&quot; &quot;regulatory guidance and compliance,&quot; &quot;political advocacy,&quot; &quot;functionalism,&quot; and &quot;principlism.&quot; None succeed in identifying a unique area of expertise for successful bioe...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520271</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520271</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Look who's talking: the interdisciplinarity of bioethics and the implications for bioethics education.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520270&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17162731%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Iltis AS
    There are competing accounts of the birth of bioethics. Despite the differences among them, these accounts share the claim that bioethics was not born in a single disciplinary home or in a single social space, but in numerous, including hospitals, doctors' offices, research laboratories, courtrooms, medical schools, churches and synagogues, and philosophy classrooms. This essay considers the interdisciplinarity of bioethics and the contribution of new disciplines to bioethics. It also explores the implications of interdisciplinarity for bioethics education. As bioethics develops, it will be helpful to identify essential elements in the education of bioethicists and to distinguish between members of other disciplines who make important contributions to bioethics and bi...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520270</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520270</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The right to die as the triumph of autonomy.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520269&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17162732%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Beauchamp TL
    
    PMID: 17162732 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520269</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520269</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>On evoking clinical meaning.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520268&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17162733%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Zaner RM
    It was in the course of one particular clinical encounter that I came to realize the power of narrative, especially for expressing clinically presented ethical matters. In Husserlian terms, the mode of evidence proper to the unique and the singular is the very indirection that is the genius of story-telling. Moreover, the clinical consultant is unavoidably changed by his or her clinical involvement. The individuals whose situation is at issue have their own stories that need telling. Clinical ethics is in this sense a way of helping patients, families, and, yes, health providers to discover and give voice to those stories. In this way, clinical ethics is an evoking of meaning. Kierkegaard understood this well: Indirect communication is the language for the unique and ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520268</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520268</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>&quot;Life is short, medicine is long&quot;: reflections on a bioethical insight.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520267&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17162734%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Jonsen AR
    The famous first aphorism of Hippocrates, &quot;Life is short, the art is long&quot; was long considered a perfect summary of medical ethics. Modern physicians find the words impossible to understand. But it can be interpreted as a fundamental insight into the ethical problems of modern medicine. The technology of modern scientific medicine can sustain life, even when life is losing its vitality. How should decisions be made about the use of technology and by whom? This is the incessant question of modern medical ethics.
    PMID: 17162734 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520267</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520267</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How not to criticize the precautionary principle.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520278&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17079207%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>This article argues that while there are problems with standard formulations of the principle, Harris and Holm's rejection of all its forms is mistaken. In particular, they focus on strong versions of the principle and fail to recognize that weaker forms, which may escape their criticisms, are both possible and advocated in the literature.
    PMID: 17079207 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520278</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Oct 2006 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520278</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who's in the business of saving lives?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520277&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17079208%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Lee Chang P
    There are individuals, including children, dying needlessly in poverty-stricken third world countries. Many of these deaths could be prevented if pharmaceutical companies provided the drugs needed to save their lives. Some believe that because pharmaceutical companies have the power to save lives, and because they can do so with little effort, they have a special obligation. I argue that there is no distinction, with respect to obligations and responsibilities, between pharmaceutical companies and other types of companies. As a result, to hold pharmaceutical companies especially responsible for saving lives in third world countries is unjustified.
    PMID: 17079208 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520277</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Oct 2006 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520277</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Balancing in ethical deliberation: superior to specification and casuistry.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520276&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17079209%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: DeMarco JP, Ford PJ
    Approaches to clinical ethics dilemmas that rely on basic principles or rules are difficult to apply because of vagueness and conflict among basic values. In response, casuistry rejects the use of basic values, and specification produces a large set of specified rules that are presumably easily applicable. Balancing is a method employed to weigh the relative importance of different and conflicting values in application. We argue against casuistry and specification, claiming that balancing is superior partly because it most clearly exhibits the reasoning behind moral decision-making. Hence, balancing may be most effective in teaching bioethics to medical professionals.
    PMID: 17079209 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Phi...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520276</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Oct 2006 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520276</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The concept of underinsurance: a general typology.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520275&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17079210%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Ward A
    In a 2002 speech, Mark McClellan, a member of the Council of Economic Advisors at the White House, said that &quot;[I]n the president's vision, all Americans should have access to high-quality and affordable healthcare.&quot; However, many healthcare researchers believe that a growing number of Americans are underinsured. Because any characterization of underinsurance will refer to the value judgments of people about what counts as &quot;adequate&quot; and &quot;inadequate&quot; healthcare, the goal of characterizing and measuring the underinsured is difficult to achieve. In this article, I examine the various dimensions of underinsurance, and propose a typology incorporating those dimensions.
    PMID: 17079210 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] (Source: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy)</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520275</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Oct 2006 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520275</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Calculating risk/benefit in X-linked severe combined immune deficiency disorder (X-SCID) gene therapy trials: the task of ethical evaluation.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520274&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D17079211%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Swazo NK
    In response to adverse events in retroviral gene therapy clinical trials conducted in France to correct for X-linked severe combined immune deficiency disorder (X-SCID), an advisory committee of the Food and Drug Administration convened in October 2002, February 2003, and March 2005, to deliberate and provide recommendations for similarly sponsored research in the United States. A similar National Institutes of Health committee met in February 2003. In this article, I review the transcripts and/or minutes of these meetings to evaluate the extent to which the ethical dimension of the research was engaged even as the molecular and clinical evidence was reviewed. I then provide representative ethical arguments to demonstrate the sort of ethical reasoning that should be i...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520274</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Oct 2006 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520274</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Freedom-costs of canonical individualism: enforced euthanasia tolerance in Belgium and the problem of European liberalism.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520283&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D16920691%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Delkeskamp-Hayes C
    Belgium's policy of not permitting Catholic hospitals to refuse euthanasia services rests on ethical presuppositions concerning the secular justification of political power which reveal the paradoxical character of European liberalism: In endorsing freedom as a value (rather than as a side constraint), liberalism prioritizes first-order intentions, thus discouraging lasting moral commitments and the authority of moral communities in supporting such commitments. The state itself is thus transformed into a moral community of its own. Alternative policies (such as an explicit moral diversification of public healthcare or the greater tolerance for Christian institutions in the Netherlands) are shown to be incompatible with Europe's liberal concern with securing ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520283</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2006 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520283</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The logic of diagnosis: Peirce, literary narrative, and the history of present illness.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520282&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D16920692%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Schleifer R, Vannatta J
    This essay presents a theoretical construct upon which to base a working--&quot;pragmatic&quot;--definition of the History of Present Illness (HPI). The major thesis of this essay is that analysis of both the logic of hypothesis formation and literary narrative--especially detective stories--facilitates understanding of the diagnostic process. The essay examines three elements necessary to a successful development of a patient's HPI: the logic of hypothesis formation, based upon the work of the philosopher-logician, Charles Sanders Peirce; the organization of knowledge in relation to structures of narrative; and the feedback necessary to the successful physician-interviewer. It concludes with a systematic description of the design of hypothesis formation within d...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520282</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2006 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520282</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Care of the self and American physicians' place in the &quot;war on terror&quot;: a Foucauldian reading of senator Bill Frist, MD.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1520281&amp;cid=s_37099_74_f&amp;fid=37099&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Ftmpl%3DNoSidebarfile%26db%3DPubMed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26list_uids%3D16920693%26dopt%3DAbstract</link>
            <description>Authors: Bates BR
    American physicians are increasingly concerned that they are losing professional control. Other analysts of medical power argue that physicians have too much power. This essay argues that current analyses are grounded in a structuralist reading of power. Deploying Michel Foucault's &quot;care of the self&quot; and rhetorician Raymie McKerrow's &quot;critical rhetoric,&quot; this essay claims that medical power is better understood as a way that medical actors take on power through rhetoric rather than a force that has power over medical actors. Through a close reading of an essay by Senator Bill Frist, this paper argues that physicians experience a process of &quot;subjection&quot; wherein they are both agents of and objects of medical power as it is combined with state and corporate power in the ...</description>
            <author>The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy</author>
            <type>journals</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1520281</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2006 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1520281</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
