The second section of Lauren Hall's "A Classical-Liberal Response to the Crisis of Bioethics" article is entitled "The Crisis of Bioethics". The author divides the bioethics crisis into 4 components: purpose, principles, expectations, and authority. For each crisis component she details her concerns.
Regarding the bioethics crisis of purpose, Hall suggests a reasonable purpose, reports that others have promoted multiple conflicting purposes, and notes the schism between mainstream bioethics and conservative bioethics.
Regarding the bioethics crisis of principles, Hall argues that the standard principles that have been used (such as autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence) are vague and, therefore, essentially useless.
Regarding the bioethics crisis of expectations, Hall claims that low expectations are more realistic than high expectations for all forms of ethical analysis.
Regarding the bioethics crisis of authority, Hall reports that, currently, multiple parties responsible for decision-making means no parties are responsible for decision-making.
What is the LIBERTARIAN BIOETHICS BLOGger's reaction to this section of Hall's article? He believes the schism between mainstream bioethics and conservative bioethics is another reason to create a libertarian bioethics, the standard bioethics principles are vague and ill-defined, low expectations are appropriate for non-libertarian bioethics, and libertarian bioethics can clearly define the appropriate person or persons responsible for medical decision-making. Yes, libertarian bioethics is ambitious.
Regarding the bioethics crisis of purpose, Hall suggests a reasonable purpose, reports that others have promoted multiple conflicting purposes, and notes the schism between mainstream bioethics and conservative bioethics.
Regarding the bioethics crisis of principles, Hall argues that the standard principles that have been used (such as autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence) are vague and, therefore, essentially useless.
Regarding the bioethics crisis of expectations, Hall claims that low expectations are more realistic than high expectations for all forms of ethical analysis.
Regarding the bioethics crisis of authority, Hall reports that, currently, multiple parties responsible for decision-making means no parties are responsible for decision-making.
What is the LIBERTARIAN BIOETHICS BLOGger's reaction to this section of Hall's article? He believes the schism between mainstream bioethics and conservative bioethics is another reason to create a libertarian bioethics, the standard bioethics principles are vague and ill-defined, low expectations are appropriate for non-libertarian bioethics, and libertarian bioethics can clearly define the appropriate person or persons responsible for medical decision-making. Yes, libertarian bioethics is ambitious.
RSS Feed
