Knowledge and attitudes towards preimplantation genetic diagnosis in Germany.
(73/310)
BACKGROUND: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is a technique which is often related to emotional debates because of its ethical and social implications. Worldwide there are different forms of legislation; Germany constitutes an interesting case because of the historical background concerning eugenics and dealing with handicapped persons at the time of national socialism. PGD is currently not legal but there are still polarized positions and legalization remains an issue. Studies about the attitudes of the general population towards PGD are rare. METHODS: Data were collected in a representative survey carried out in November 2003. Subjects were 2110 persons in Germany aged 18-50 years. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Respondents had little knowledge about PGD. There were incorrect assumptions about the diagnostic possibilities and a lack of basic genetic knowledge. A tendency towards a general acceptance of PGD for medical indications was found. Non-medical indications such as sex selection were generally not accepted. It could be observed that respondents who already had a notion about PGD overestimated the diagnostic possibilities and would eventually use PGD in the future more than respondents who had never heard about PGD before. (+info)
Surveys on attitudes towards legalisation of euthanasia: importance of question phrasing.
(74/310)
AIM: To explore whether the phrasing of the questions and the response alternatives would influence the answers to questions about legalisation of euthanasia. METHODS: Results were compared from two different surveys in populations with similar characteristics. The alternatives "positive", "negative", and "don't know" (first questionnaire) were replaced with an explanatory text, "no legal sanction", four types of legal sanctions, and no possibility to answer "don't know" (second questionnaire). Four undergraduate student groups (engineering, law, medicine, and nursing) answered. RESULTS: In the first questionnaire (n = 684) 43% accepted euthanasia (range 28-50%), 14% (8-33%) did not, and 43% (39-59%) answered "don't know". Two per cent of the respondents declined to answer. In comparison with previous surveys on attitudes to euthanasia the proportion of "don't know" was large. The results of the second questionnaire (n = 639), showed that 38% favoured "no legal prosecution" (26-50%). However, 62% (50-74%) opted for different kinds of legal sanctions, and two of four groups expressed significantly different views in the two surveys. A proportion of 10% declined to answer the second questionnaire. CONCLUSION: An introduction of an explanatory text and a wider range of response alternatives produced differences between the results of the two surveys conducted. (+info)
Cell phoney: human cloning after Quintavalle.
(75/310)
Reproductive cloning has thrown up new scientific possibilities, ethical conundrums, and legal challenges. An initial question, considered by the English courts in 2003, was whether the technique presently available, that of cell nucleus replacement, falls outside the provisions of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. If it does, the creation and use, including use in research protocols, of human embryos would be unregulated, disclosing a need to consider remedial legislation. The resolution by the courts of this legal question dramatically engages them in a resolution of fundamental ethical dilemmas, and discloses the possibilities and limitation of negotiating science policy through the processes of litigation. (+info)
Reproductive and therapeutic cloning, germline therapy, and purchase of gametes and embryos: comments on Canadian legislation governing reproduction technologies.
(76/310)
In Canada, the Assisted Human Reproduction Act received royal assent on 29 March 2004. The approach proposed by the federal government responds to Canadians' strong desire for an enforceable legislative framework in the field of reproduction technologies through criminal law. As a result of the widening gap between the rapid pace of technological change and governing legislation, a distinct need was perceived to create a regulatory framework to guide decisions regarding reproductive technologies. In this article the three main topics covered in the new legislation are commented on: cloning, germline therapy, and purchase of gametes and embryos. Some important issues also covered in the new legislation, such as privacy and access to information, data protection, identity of donors, and inspection, will not be addressed. (+info)
Variations and voids: the regulation of human cloning around the world.
(77/310)
BACKGROUND: No two countries have adopted identical regulatory measures on cloning. Understanding the complexity of these regulatory variations is essential. It highlights the challenges associated with the regulation of a controversial and rapidly evolving area of science and sheds light on a regulatory framework that can accommodate this reality. METHODS: Using the most reliable information available, we have performed a survey of the regulatory position of thirty countries around the world regarding the creation and use of cloned embryos (see Table 1). We have relied on original and translated legislation, as well as published sources and personal communications. We have examined the regulation of both reproductive cloning (RC) and non-reproductive cloning (NRC). RESULTS: While most of the countries studied have enacted national legislation, the absence of legislation in seven of these countries should not be equated with the absence of regulation. Senator Morin was not correct in stating that the majority of recent legislation bans both RC and NRC. Recent regulatory moves are united only with regard to the banning of RC. While NRC is not permitted in seventeen of the countries examined, it could be permitted in up to thirteen countries. CONCLUSIONS: There is little consensus on the various approaches to cloning laws and policies, and the regulatory position in many countries remains uncertain. (+info)
Medical students' ethical, legal and cross-cultural experiences during their clinical studies.
(78/310)
BACKGROUND: Many medical school curricula include training for ethical considerations, legal comprehension, implementation of patients' rights, awareness of cultural differences, and communication skills (ELCE). OBJECTIVES: To explore medical students' perceptions of their ELCE training during the clinical phase as well as the relationship between humanistic practice skills' experiences and the quality of clinical training. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was carried out in two cohorts during their clinical year period at Tel Aviv University's Sackler Faculty of Medicine at the end of their Internal Medicine and Surgery clerkships in the 2002 academic year. The research tool was an 18 item Likert-type questionnaire (ELCEQ), based on the literature of biomedical ethics, legal aspects and behavior of practice skills. The content validation of the questionnaire was established by consulting experts among the school's faculty. It was circulated among the students by representatives of the Unit of Medical Education. RESULTS: The response rate was 88%. Students reported only a few opportunities for gaining experience in humanistic practice skills. A weak correlation was found between students' assessment of the quality of clinical training and their experiences in humanistic practice skills. CONCLUSIONS: A wider and more relevant range of active experiences in humanistic practice skills should be available to students during the clerkships. Correspondingly, there is a need for the clinical faculty to find innovative ways to internalize their task as role models and ensure that students acquire and are able to practice those skills. (+info)
Medical devices; medical device reporting. Direct final rule.
(79/310)
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is amending its regulation governing reporting of deaths, serious injuries, and certain malfunctions related to medical devices. We are revising the regulation into plain language to make the regulation easier to understand, and we are making technical corrections. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, we are publishing a companion proposed rule, under FDA's usual procedures for notice and comment, to provide a procedural framework to finalize the rule in the event we receive any significant adverse comment and withdraw the direct final rule. (+info)
The case for physician assisted suicide: not (yet) proven.
(80/310)
The legalization of physician assisted suicide (PAS) in Oregon and physician assisted death (PAD) in The Netherlands has revitalized the debate over whether and under what conditions individuals should be able to determine the time and manner of their deaths, and whether they should be able to enlist the help of physicians in doing so. Although the change in the law is both dramatic and recent, the basic arguments for and against have not really changed since the issue was debated by Glanville Williams and Yale Kamisar nearly 50 years ago. In this paper, the author argues in favour of Kamisar's consequentialist framework. Any change in law and social policy should not be based solely on individual cases, heart wrenching though these may be. Instead, we need to assess the need for PAS, and weigh this against the risks of mistake and abuse. (+info)