Political Bioethics
(2022) In The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy p.1-22- Abstract
- If bioethical questions cannot be resolved in a widely acceptable manner by rational argument, and if they can be regulated only on the basis of political decision-making, then bioethics belongs to the political sphere. The particular kind of politics practiced in any given society matters greatly: it will determine the kind of bioethical regulation, legislation, and public policy generated there. I propose approaching bioethical questions politically in terms of decisions that cannot be “correct” but that can be “procedurally legitimate.” Two procedures in particular can deliver legitimate bioethical decisions, once combined: expert bioethics committees and deliberative democracy. Bioethics so understood can exceed bioethics as a moral... (More)
- If bioethical questions cannot be resolved in a widely acceptable manner by rational argument, and if they can be regulated only on the basis of political decision-making, then bioethics belongs to the political sphere. The particular kind of politics practiced in any given society matters greatly: it will determine the kind of bioethical regulation, legislation, and public policy generated there. I propose approaching bioethical questions politically in terms of decisions that cannot be “correct” but that can be “procedurally legitimate.” Two procedures in particular can deliver legitimate bioethical decisions, once combined: expert bioethics committees and deliberative democracy. Bioethics so understood can exceed bioethics as a moral project or as a set of administrative principles to regulate medical practice; it can now aspire to a democratic project that involves ordinary citizens as far as reasonably possible. I advance this argument in four steps: (1) using the example of human germline gene editing, (2) I propose a general understanding of proceduralism, and (3) then combine two types and (4) conclude with a defense of majoritarian proceduralism. I develop this argument in terms of one example: germline gene editing. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/66d7a8de-e2fe-4dd6-b9ff-f9626e16efca
- author
- Gregg, Benjamin LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2022-05-04
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Deliberative democracy, Expert committees, Germline gene editing, Politics in bioethics, Proceduralism, Thick and thin norms, Human rights, Deliberativ demokrati, Expertkommittéer, Ärftlig genredigering, Politik i bioetik, Proceduralism, Kollektivistiska och individualistiska normer, Mänskliga rättigheter
- in
- The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy
- pages
- 22 pages
- publisher
- Oxford University Press
- ISSN
- 0360-5310
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 66d7a8de-e2fe-4dd6-b9ff-f9626e16efca
- date added to LUP
- 2022-05-07 18:55:15
- date last changed
- 2022-08-30 16:32:36
@article{66d7a8de-e2fe-4dd6-b9ff-f9626e16efca,
abstract = {{If bioethical questions cannot be resolved in a widely acceptable manner by rational argument, and if they can be regulated only on the basis of political decision-making, then bioethics belongs to the political sphere. The particular kind of politics practiced in any given society matters greatly: it will determine the kind of bioethical regulation, legislation, and public policy generated there. I propose approaching bioethical questions politically in terms of decisions that cannot be “correct” but that can be “procedurally legitimate.” Two procedures in particular can deliver legitimate bioethical decisions, once combined: expert bioethics committees and deliberative democracy. Bioethics so understood can exceed bioethics as a moral project or as a set of administrative principles to regulate medical practice; it can now aspire to a democratic project that involves ordinary citizens as far as reasonably possible. I advance this argument in four steps: (1) using the example of human germline gene editing, (2) I propose a general understanding of proceduralism, and (3) then combine two types and (4) conclude with a defense of majoritarian proceduralism. I develop this argument in terms of one example: germline gene editing.}},
author = {{Gregg, Benjamin}},
issn = {{0360-5310}},
keywords = {{Deliberative democracy; Expert committees; Germline gene editing; Politics in bioethics; Proceduralism; Thick and thin norms; Human rights; Deliberativ demokrati; Expertkommittéer; Ärftlig genredigering; Politik i bioetik; Proceduralism; Kollektivistiska och individualistiska normer; Mänskliga rättigheter}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{05}},
pages = {{1--22}},
publisher = {{Oxford University Press}},
series = {{The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy}},
title = {{Political Bioethics}},
year = {{2022}},
}