« 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12
142 Ibid.; for just a few of the examples, see references in the Feb. 2, 1994, meetings: to ACOG, pp. 31, 85; to the AFS, pp.104-106; to NABER, pp. 85-87. I would stress that scientific, philosophical and theological details directly out of the published works of McCormick and Grobstein (both of whom were on the respective "Ethics Committees" of these organizations) were referenced in the testimonies of these organizations and of those papers contracted by the NIH Panel. Examples of the accepted use of the term "pre-embryo" in the papers contracted by the NIH Panel for the Feb. 2 meeting includes that of Jonathan Blerkom pp. (53-80); and recorded in the Feb.3 meeting include those of Lori Andrews (pp. 6-22), and Bonnie Steinbock (45-55). The term was also advocated by the "ethics co-chair" of this Panel, Sister Carol Tauer, who had worked for her doctoral dissertation on "fetal personhood" under Richard McCormick (Feb. 3 meeting, p. 27; April 11 meeting, esp. pp. 23-41); and by the other "ethics co-chair", Ron Green (April 11 meeting, esp. pp. 9-22). Sr. Tauer had studied for her dissertation on "fetal personhood" at Georgetown under Richard McCormick. The term was also accepted by Catholic theologian Lisa Cahill (a Catholic member of NABER, an organization funded and started by ACOG and AFS); by Pat King, quoting Andre Hellegers at the April 11 meeting (p. 17) (King was a Georgetown law professor and original member of the National Commission and the NIH Human Fetal Tissue Transplant Research Commission; and by Duane Alexander (Director, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH) (Feb. 2 meeting, p.31). For additional examples see the minutes of the several other meetings of the NIH Panel in March, April, May, June and September.[Back]
143 Ibid., see statement by OPRR Director Gary Ellis, Feb. 2 meeting, p. 21.[Back]
144 For lengthy refutations of much of the erroneous human embryology and philosophy used in these NIH Human Embryo Research Panel debates, see references in notes 2, 4, and 68, especially: Irving, A Philosophical and Scientific Analysis of the Nature of the Early Human Embryo (Doctoral Dissertation; Department of Philosophy, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.: University Microfilms, 1991), especially Chapter 3; Irving, "When Does a Human Being Begin? 'Scientific' Myths and Scientific Facts", International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy (1999), 19:3/4:22-47; Ward C. Kischer and Dianne N. Irving, The Human Development Hoax: Time To Tell The Truth! (1997, distributed by American Life League); "Science, Philosophy and Expertise: An Evaluation of the Arguments on 'Personhood'", Linacre Quarterly (Feb.1993), 60(1):18-46; Irving, "Individual Testimony Before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel - March 14, 1994", reprinted in Linacre Quarterly (Nov. 1994), 61(4):82-89; Irving, "Embryo Research: A Call For Closer Scrutiny", Linacre Quarterly (July 17, 1994).[Back]
145 National Institutes of Health: Report of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel (Washington, D.C.: National Institutes of Health, 1994), pp. 45-47.[Back]
146 E.g., see Alta Charo, "The Hunting of the Snark: The Moral Status of Embryos, Right-to-Lifers, and Third World Women", Stanford Law and Policy (1995), 6:11-27; George Annas, Art Caplan and S. Elias, "The Politics of Human Embryo Research -- Avoiding Ethical Gridlock", New England Journal of Medicine (1996), 334:1329-1332; Dan Callahan, "The Puzzle of Profound Respect", Hastings Center Report (1995), 25:39-43.[Back]
147 [Congressional ban on human embryo research] P.L. 105-277, section 511,112 STAT. 2681-386; current legislation, Section 510 of the Fiscal Year 2000 Labor/HHS Appropriations Act (reprinted in 145 Cong. Record, Nov. 17, 1999, p. H12400); enacted by cross-reference, Section 1000(a)(4) of the Fiscal Year 2000 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 106- 113). [http://bioethics.gov/about/eo12975.htm].[Back]
148 [National Bioethics Advisory Commission] Federal Register: October 5, 1995 (Volume 60, Number 193), pp. 52063-52065; Presidential Documents, Executive Order 12975 of October 3, 1995: Protection of Human Research Subjects and Creation of National Bioethics Advisory Commission. [http://www.bioethics.gov/nbac.html][Back]
148 NBAC: Ethical Issues in Human Stem Cell Research; Executive Summary, September 1999, pp. 1-3 ff. [http://bioethics.gov/exec.summ.pdf].[Back]
150 For a typical example of the blanket acceptance of the bioethics precedents, etc., (albeit with his own "mix"), see the NBAC commissioned paper by John C. Fletcher, "Deliberating Incrementally on Human Pluripotential Stem Cell Research", [http://bioethics.gov/stemcell2.pdf]. [Back]
151 [National Bioethics Advisory Commission] Federal Register: October 5, 1995 (Volume 60, Number 193), pp. 52063-52065; Presidential Documents, Executive Order 12975 of October 3, 1995: Protection of Human Research Subjects and Creation of National Bioethics Advisory Commission, [http://www.bioethics.gov/nbac.html].[Back]
152 Ibid., [http://www.bioethics.gov/nbac.html].[Back]
153 NBAC also incorporated its bioethics presuppositions in a related study -- see Irving, "Testimony Against the Use of Human Biological Materials in Experimental Research", in the NBAC Report: The Use of Human Biological Materials in Research: Ethical Issues and Policy Guidance, Appendix (Government Printing Office, 1999), submitted February 1999.[Back]
154 See "Memorandum" of DHHS counsel to Harold Varmus, "Federal Funding for Research Involving Human Pluripotential Stem Cells, Jan. 15, 1999.[Back]
155 Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health Guidelines for Research Using Human Pluripotent Stem Cells, Federal Register, 65[166]:51975-81, Aug. 25, 2000; [64 Fed. Reg. 67576 (Dec. 2, 1999)] [http://www.nih.gov/news/stemcell/stemcellguidelines.htm]. [Back]
156 See Varmus' statements, as well as all other relevant NIH documents concerning stem cell research, on the official NIH web site: [http://www.nih.gov/news/stemcell/statement.htm]. Note also the NIH "Stem Cell Primer" posted on this site, also containing the same erroneous scientific terminology.[Back]
157 See, e.g., Irving, A Philosophical and Scientific Analysis of the Nature of the Early Human Embryo (Doctoral Dissertation; Department of Philosophy, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.: University Microfilm, 1991), especially Chapter 3; Irving, "When Does a Human Being Begin? 'Scientific' Myths and Scientific Facts", International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy (1999), 19:3/4:22-47; Ward C. Kischer and Dianne N. Irving, The Human Development Hoax: Time To Tell The Truth! (1997, distributed by American Life League); "Science, Philosophy and Expertise: An Evaluation of the Arguments on 'Personhood'", Linacre Quarterly (Feb.1993), 60(1):18-46; see also Irving, notes 2, 4, and 68 supra.[Back]
158 See Irving, "Testimony Against the Use of Human Embryonic Stem Cells in Experimental Research", officially submitted to NIH on January 28, 2000; Irving, "Stem Cell Research: Some Pros and Cons", UFL PRO VITA: Newsletter of the University Faculty for Life, Washington, D.C.; Vol. X, No. 1 (October 1999), pp. 1-2; Irving, "Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Are Official Positions Based on Scientific Fraud?", Communique July 24, 1999.[Back]
160 In addition to those already mentioned, see e.g., Tom Beauchamp and Terry Pinkard, Ethics and Public Policy (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1983).[Back]
161 Jonsen, pp. 362-365.[Back]
162 See, e.g., Tom Beauchamp, Case Studies in Business, Society and Ethics (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1983). [Back]
163 Charles Harris, Michael Pritchard, and Michael Rabins, Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1995), esp. pp. 97-102; p. 186 note 4; p. 224 notes 2 and 3.[Back]
164 Jonsen, pp. 342-344.[Back]
171 For an interesting recent argument against the use of "case studies" in bioethics, see Tod Chambers, The Fiction of Bioethics: Cases as Literary Texts (New York: Routledge, 1999).[Back]
173 See Irving, "Science, Philosophy and Expertise: An Evaluation of the Arguments on 'Personhood'", Linacre Quarterly (Feb. 1993), 60(1):18-46; Irving, "Which Ethics for the 21st Century? A Comparison of 'Secular Bioethics' and Roman Catholic Medical Ethics", Linacre Quarterly (in press).[Back]
174 David J. Rothman, Strangers at the Bedside: A History of How Law and Bioethics Transformed Medical Decision Making (New York: BasicBooks/Perseus Books, L.L.C., 1991).[Back]
« 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12