Bioethics Must Exemplify a Clear Path toward Justice: A Call to Action.
Bioethics Must Exemplify a Clear Path toward Justice: A Call to Action.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/15265161.2021.2001113
复制
发表时间：
2022-01
影响因子：
13.4
通讯作者：
Ray, Keisha
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fletcher, Faith;Thomas, Shameka Poetry;Lapite, Folasade C.;Ray, Keisha
Fabi和Goldberg（2022年）提出了关于生物伦理学领域研究和资助优先事项的重要考虑，特别是该领域与社会正义的不一致。虽然我们同意，资金是一个学术领域的优先事项的主要驱动力之一，我们认为，生物伦理学领域必须首先通过表现出对社会正义和反种族主义的承诺，在生物伦理学的收费。因此，将社会正义置于优先供资的首位，需要重新确定生物伦理学的使命和愿景的中心内容。这一转变还要求深入研究该领域的历史和当代结构，实践和规范，抑制某些生物伦理学问题获得学术知名度和突出地位。Fabi和Goldberg强调，在其他关注问题中，缺乏生物伦理学资金，用于从伦理学角度研究持续健康不平等的结构性原因，包括解决为什么在美国，黑人妇女死于可预防的妊娠或分娩相关并发症的可能性比白色妇女高243（亚当斯和托马斯，2018年;麦克莱莫尔，2018年;马丁和蒙塔涅，2017年）。我们认为，缺乏分配的生物伦理学资金，以解决这一国家公共卫生危机（国家心脏，肺，血液研究所，“系统性种族主义，孕产妇死亡和疾病的一个关键风险因素”）是反映该领域的历史和当前的道德失败，优先考虑健康和医疗保健的不公平。可以说，生物伦理学的基本框架忽视了生活经验，困境，痛苦和集体创伤所经历的少数民族的个人和社区的结构性不公正的直接结果。学者们认为，生物伦理学家应该关注道德体验，将其作为一个调查框架，以充分捕捉对个人和社区都有价值的道德风险和价值（Hunt和Ravale 2011; Ray 2021 b）。事实上，生物伦理学家有责任阐明那些因结构性种族主义（Danis et al. 2016）和其他形式的系统性边缘化而处于不利地位的人的道德经历和现实。因此，我们认为，生物伦理学领域必须为正义开辟一条明确的道路，并表明迫切需要资金，优先考虑在该领域代表性不足的公平问题。其余部分举例说明了为什么生物伦理学领域必须以正义为先导。
Fabi and Goldberg (2022) raised important considerations regarding both research and funding priorities in the field of bioethics and, in particular, the field’s misalignment with social justice. While we agree that funding is one of the main drivers of an academic field’s priorities, we argue that the field of bioethics must first lead the charge by demonstrating a commitment to social justice and anti-racism in bioethics. Shifting social justice to the forefront of funding priorities thus requires reprioritizing what ought to be central to the mission and vision of bioethics. This shift also demands deeply examining the field’s historic and contemporary structures, practices, and norms that inhibit certain bioethics issues from gaining academic visibility and prominence. Among other concerns Fabi and Goldberg highlighted the paucity of bioethics funding directed toward efforts to ethically examine the structural causes of persistent health inequities, including those that would address why Black women are 243% more likely than white women to die from preventable pregnancy-or childbirth-related complications in the United States (Adams and Thomas 2018; McLemore 2018; Martin and Montagne 2017). We argue that a lack of allocated bioethics funding to address this national public health crisis (National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute,“Systemic Racism, a Key Risk Factor for Maternal Death and Illness”) is reflective of the field’s historic and current moral failure to prioritize health and health care inequities. Arguably, the foundational framing of bioethics neglects the lived experiences, dilemmas, distress, and collective trauma experienced by minoritized individuals and communities as a direct result of structural injustice. Scholars maintain that bioethicists should be concerned with the moral experience as a framework of inquiry to fully capture what is ethically at stake and of value to both individuals and communities (Hunt and Carnevale 2011; Ray 2021b). Indeed, bioethicists have a duty to illuminate the moral experiences and realities of those disadvantaged by structural racism (Danis et al. 2016) and other forms of systematic marginalization. Thus, we contend that the field of bioethics must exemplify a clear path toward justice and demonstrate the urgent need for funding that prioritizes equity concerns underrepresented in the field. The remaining sections are examples of why the field of bioethics must lead this charge with justice at the fore.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
13.4
作者：
Fabi, Rachel;Goldberg, Daniel S.
通讯作者：
Goldberg, Daniel S.
影响因子：
--
作者：
Thomas SP;Amini K;Floyd KJ;Willard R;Wossenseged F;Keller M;Scott JB;Abdallah KE;Buscetta A;Bonham VL
通讯作者：
Bonham VL
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Adams, Crystal;Thomas, Shameka Poetry
通讯作者：
Thomas, Shameka Poetry
影响因子：
13.4
作者：
Danis, Marion;Wilson, Yolonda;White, Amina
通讯作者：
White, Amina
影响因子：
1.4
作者：
Fletcher FE;Rice WS;Ingram LA;Fisher CB
通讯作者：
Fisher CB