wolbring
virtualjess
Spirit of our Time
Ingo
dsobsey
johnsutton
Cressida
Edward Stein
Joanne Faulkner
claudiamalacrida
biella
jmaybee
ronamundson
Masahiro Morioka
In Darkest Night
mikabodet
mworkman
jackieostrem
kristina
nickagar
angie
manypetunias
Michael.Billinger
stremain
eschwitz
misscato
emigrl
huahima
ScienceDaily (Oct. 29, 2009) — Lack of health insurance might have led or contributed to nearly 17,000 deaths among hospitalized children in the United States in the span of less than two decades, according to research led by the Johns Hopkins Children’s Center.
This is the official announcement of a new Target Article that has been accepted for publication in a forthcoming issue of AJOB.
============================
Ashley Revisited: A Response to the Critics
by
Douglas S. Diekema
LINK TO ARTICLE:
http://editorial.bioethics.net
============================
Open Peer Commentaries are now invited on this Target Article. Open Peer Commentary articles are typically between 500-1500 words and contain no more than 10 references. A guide to writing an Open Peer Commentary is available under the Resources section “Instructions and Forms” at http://editorial.bioethics.net.
We ask that by Wednesday, October 7th, you submit a short summary of your proposed Open Peer Commentary (no more than 2-4 sentences). Please submit your proposal online via the AJOB Editorial site, following the instructions provided there. We ask that you do not prepare a full commentary yet. Once we have evaluated your proposal, we will contact you via email to let you know whether or not we were able to include you on the final list of those to be asked to submit an Open Peer Commentary.
You will then have until Wednesday, October 21st, to submit your full Open Peer Commentary. Please keep in mind that, except for rare exceptions, authors are limited to one Open Peer Commentary per journal issue.
To help you decide whether or not you will be an appropriate commentator for the forthcoming Target Article, you may consult the abstracts below and access the complete article as a PDF file by going to the URL above. If you do not have Adobe Acrobat and are unable to read PDF files, you may download free Adobe Acrobat Reader software for any computer platform, at http://www.adobe.com .
AJOB and Taylor & Francis also assist Open Peer Commentators with disabilities by providing the Target Article in other formats on request.
We ask that you not reproduce or cite the Target Articles or Open Peer Commentaries on the Editorial web site, as they have not yet been edited for publication. Please cite only published materials from AJOB (as indexed at the Journal’s website, http://www.bioethics.net ).
============================
Ashley Revisited: A Response to the Critics
by
Douglas S. Diekema
==========================
ABSTRACT: The case of Ashley X involved a young girl with profound and permanent developmental disability who underwent growth attenuation using high dose estrogen, a hysterectomy, and surgical removal of her breast buds. Many individuals and groups have been critical of the decisions made by Ashley’s parents, physicians, and the hospital ethics committee that supported the decision. While some of the opposition has been grounded in distorted facts and misunderstandings, others have raised important concerns. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief review of the case and the issues it raised, then address 25 distinct substantive arguments that have been proposed as reasons that Ashley’s treatment might be unethical. We conclude that while some important concerns have been raised, the weight of these concerns is not sufficient to consider the interventions used in Ashley’s case to be contrary to her best interests, nor are they sufficient to preclude similar use of these interventions in the future for carefully selected patients who might also benefit from them.
==============================
The Disability Studies Program at the University of Washington presents:
“EUGENICS AND DISABILITY: HISTORY AND LEGACY IN WASHINGTON”
A one-day public symposium examining the history and significance of eugenics in Washington, which in 1909 became the second state to enact a forced sterilization law. This event will provide a forum for dialogue about the eugenic past and its current implications.
Friday, October 9, 2009
9 a.m. – 3 p.m.
UW Tower Auditorium, 4333 Brooklyn Ave. NE, Seattle, Washington 98195
Registration is required. This event is free and open to the public.
Lunch will be provided at no cost to registered attendees.
To register and for further information, go to:
http://eugenics.washington.edu
Or contact Tammi Olson, tammio@uw.edu (email), 425-774-4446 (voice), 425-774-9303 (fax), 425-771-7438 (TTY).
For information about symposium content, email Joanne Woiak, UW Disability Studies Program, jwoiak@uw.edu.
To view the live and archived web broadcast of the symposium, go to www.UWTV.org.
The symposium will feature panel presentations by national and local scholars and advocates, addressing “Disability in the History of Eugenics” and “Perspectives on the Relevance of Eugenics Today.” The roundtable format will include ample time for audience discussion. The intended audience includes academics, community advocates, individuals with disabilities, clinicians, service providers, policy makers, and interested members of the general public.
Co-sponsors: UW Office of the Provost, UW Center for Genomics and Healthcare Equality, Seattle Children’s Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics, DBTAC Northwest ADA Information Center.
SHUT OUT: The Experience of People with Disabilities and their Families in Australia
National Disability Strategy Consultation Report prepared by the National People with Disabilities and Carer Council
see here
just out
Human Enhancement Study for Directorate General for internal policies, Policy Dept. A: Economic and Scientific Policy Science and Technology Options Assessments
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/publications/studies/stoa2007-13_en.pdf
Abstract
The study attempts to bridge the gap between visions on human
enhancement (HE) and the relevant technoscientific developments. It
outlines possible strategies of how to deal with HE in a European
context, identifying a reasoned pro-enhancement approach, a
reasoned restrictive approach and a case-by-case approach as viable
options for the EU. The authors propose setting up a European body
(temporary committee or working group) for the development of a
normative framework that guides the formulation of EU policies on HE.
& June 2009
In an online survey of more than 2,000 adults by leading pollster ComRes for disability charity Scope, 53 per cent say they think most people in British society see disabled people as inferior.
In addition more than half (56 per cent) said they think disabled people are generally viewed as “victims” or “figures of pity” and 38 per cent say they are even seen as a “drain on resources”.
see here press release
and here the survey
this is about a tool I use and find works fine
free ways to video conference
like Skype but one can do more than one on one
and no software download needed
I tried it so far one on one. Quality was good. Not sure the more than one on one need some people to try with me
but if that also works that should be useful I think
http://www.tokbox.com
Cheers
Gregor
Institute for Biomedical Ethics, Geneva University Medical School
Philosophy
PhD position in Bioethics
Within the project ENABLE – Protecting Vulnerable Persons in Health Care (supervisor: Samia Hurst), the Institute for Biomedical Ethics at the University of Geneva Medical School is opening one PhD position for a philosophy doctoral candidate. This project is
funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation. In collaboration with the project supervisor and within an interdisciplinary team, the successful candidate’s work will explore how vulnerability in health care can be defined analytically, as well as sources of claims for protection of the vulnerable, how convincing they are, and what effect their validity may have on fairness in resource allocation decisions. Projected duration for this position is four years.
Salary is according to the University of Geneva scale (A2 assistant, 70%, approx. 46’000 CHF per annum the first year). Within
this time frame, the successful candidate will be expected to complete a PhD thesis in philosophy under the (co-)supervision of Bernard Baertschi, on a topic broadly within the area of normative ethics and/or applied ethics.
The ideal candidate should have a Master’s degree in philosophy or equivalent, including courses in bioethics, normative ethics, applied ethics, and/or political philosophy, and at least intermediate mastery of written English.
Please send your CV, a writing sample, and letter of motivation to: Samia.hurst@unige.ch
Before: August 15th 2009
Any relevant publications (max. two) should be attached to the application and will be considered an asset.
Interviews will be held in September.
– Dr Samia Hurst Institut d’éthique biomédicale CMU/1 rue Michel Servet 1211 Genève 4 – Switzerland Tel: +4122-3793479 Fax: +4122-3793472 Blog: http://forumethix-ch.blogspot.com/ Homepage: http://ib.unige.ch/SH_homepage.php SGBE-SSEB: http://www.bioethics.ch/content/default.htm
Two recent issues of Journal of Evolution and Technology (JET)
link here
Becoming More Than Human: Technology and the Post-Human Condition Special Issue (Volume 19 Issue 1)
Intro: Sky Marsen “Introduction”
1-2: Cory Doctorow: “Leaving Behind More Than a Knucklebone”
3-7: Patrick D. Hopkins: “A Moral Vision for Transhumanism”
8-16: William Sims Bainbridge: “Cognitive Expansion Technologies”
17-27: Samuel H. Kenyon: “Would You Still Love Me If I Was A Robot?”
28-34: Riccardo Campa: “Pure Science and the Posthuman Future”
35-41: Gregory E. Jordan: “The Invention of Man: A Response to C. S. Lewis’ The Abolition of Man”
42-50: Joseph Jackson: “The Amorality of Preference: A Response to the Enemies of Enhancement”
51-61: PJ Manney: “Empathy in the Time of Technology: How Storytelling is the Key to Empathy”
62-66: George Dvorsky: “Better Living through Transhumanism”
67-72: Nick Bostrom: “Letter from Utopia”
Human Enhancement Technologies and Human Rights (HETHR) Special Issue (Volume 18 Issue 1)
i-vi: James Hughes: “Introduction”
THE ETHICS OF ENHANCEMENT
1-9: Patrick Hopkins: “Is Enhancement Worthy of Being a Right?”
10-26: Fritz Allhoff: “Germ Line Genetic-Enhancement and Rawlsian Primary Goods”:
27-34: Martin Gunderson: “Enhancing Human Rights: How the Use of Human Rights Treaties to Prohibit Genetic Engineering Weakens Human Rights”
35-41: Patrick Lin and Fritz Allhoff: “Against Unrestricted Human Enhancement”
42-49: Fred Gifford: “Ethical Issues in Enhancement Research”
50-55: Aubrey de Grey: “Our Right to Life”
DEMOCRACY, DIVERSITY AND ENHANCEMENT
56-69: Gregory Fowler and Kirk Allison: “Technology and Citizenry: A Model for Public Consultation in Science Policy Formation”
70-78: Laura Colleton: “The Elusive Line Between Enhancement and Therapy and Its Effects on Health Care in the U.S.”
79-85: Anita Silvers: “The right not to be normal as the essence of freedom”
86-93: Martin Gunderson: “Genetic Engineering and the Consent of Future Persons”
COGNITIVE ENHANCEMENT
94-107: Martine Rothblatt: “Are We Transbemans Yet?”
108-115: Mark Walker: “Cognitive Enhancement and the Identity Objection”
116-123: Eva Caldera: “Cognitive Enhancement and Theories of Justice: Contemplating the Malleability of Nature and Self”
124-128: Dawn Jakubowski: “Cognitive Enhancement and Liberatory Possibilities of Antidepressant Therapy”
129-142: George Dvorsky: “All Together Now: Considerations for biologically uplifting non-human animals”
out today
May 19, 2009
Seclusions and Restraints: Selected Cases of Death and Abuse at Public and Private Schools and Treatment Centers
GAO-09-719T, May 19, 2009
Children, especially those with disabilities, are reportedly being restrained and secluded in public and private schools and other facilities, sometimes resulting in injury and death. The…..
more here
and here
There is a lively debate around it. I find it strange that such article can appear in a student newspaper
here the article
but when one looks at other pieces it seems this column is mend to provoke
a piece Dora Raymaker on the autism blog change.org
91 ADAPT activists handcuffed themselves to the White House fence [all quotes from this article] yesterday in outrage over the exclusion of long term support from health care reform.
Join New Tactics featured resource practitioners from April 22 to 28 for an on-line dialogue featuring “Building Human Rights Cities.” New Tactics is pleased to partner on this dialogue with the PDHRE, People’s Movement for Human Rights Learning, which serves as facilitators of developing human rights cities around the world. Join us to share how local civil society leaders, members of PDHRE network, facilitate the learning about human rights as a way of life for communities to generate innovative and exciting actions towards social and economic transformation.
more here
by Margaret Talbot April 27, 2009
Every era has its defining drug. Neuroenhancers are perfectly suited for our
efficiency-obsessed, BlackBerry-equipped office culture.
Keywords Neuroenhancing Drugs; Neuroenhancers; Students; Adderall;
Stimulants; Smart Drugs; Underground
more here
COMMUNITY CALL TO ACTION:
DOES PSYCHO DONUTS IN CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA OFFEND YOU?
In March, a new donut shop opened in Campbell, California, called Psycho
Donuts. The store capitalizes on the theme of a ³fun mental institution,² a
³lighthearted insane asylum² complete with a padded cell where kids can
take photos while wearing a straightjacket, a “group therapy” area,
employees dressed in medical garb, and donuts named after psychiatric
disabilities, such as Massive Brain Trauma and Bipolar. Psycho Donuts¹
website states that it ³has taken the neighborhood donut and put it on
medication, and given it shock treatment.² The store owners have refused
meeting requests from NAMI and from the Silicon Valley Independent Living
Center. The Mayor of Campbell, Jane Kennedy, attended the ribbon cutting
for the business on April 2. The media coverage of the donut shop by the
San Jose Mercury News on March 16th unquestioningly validated the
discriminatory theme of the business.
Does this offend you? Are you as outraged about this as we are? If so,
please help us DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Send a loud and clear message to the
owners of Psycho Donuts and to the leadership of the City of Campbell that
the nationwide disability community WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS.
WHAT CAN DO YOU TO HELP? Read the rest of this entry »
National Educational Association of Disabled Students (NEADS) conference video
see here
Ars checks in from GDC09, where Emotiv Systems is showing off its new headset
that control games with both your thoughts and your facial expressions. The
surprising thing? It works. Our hands-on time with the $300 product that
knows what you’re thinking.
Stem cells that could be used to restore hearing have been
successfully created, scientists have said.
A Sheffield University team took stem cells from embryos and converted
them into cells that behave like sensory hair cells in the human inner
ear.
Their discovery could ultimately help those who have lost hair cells
through noise damage and some people born with inherited hearing
problems.
see here
Another issue for debate
