Content area
Full text
ABSTRACT
The President's Council on Bioethics, headed by Leon Kass, was created by President George W. Bush to advise the President on issues of ethical import raised by advances in biomedical science. Between 2002 and 2004, members of the Council from diverse disciplines addressed topics such as human cloning, stem cell research, assisted reproduction, and medical interventions intended to enhance human capability or appearance. This article provides background on the Council and reviews its published reports. It also considers key definitions and distinctions, specific recommendations of the Council, and positions articulated by members who contributed to the development of its reports.
REPORTS OF ADVANCES in biomedical science often evoke worry as well as wonder and high expectations on the part of the public. The wonder stems from admiration for the brilliance, creativity, and efforts of the scientists whose research led to the advances; the high expectations arise from anticipation that the advances will solve some previously intransigent obstacle to human well being, or promote some previously inconceivable human benefit. The worry associated with advances in biomedical research generally involves recognition that they may be used not only for purposes that everyone agrees are good, but also for purposes that are manifestly wrong or considered wrong by some segment of society. This worry is heightened when the research introduces possibilities for radical transformation of how human beings come into the world and fulfill the potential they bring to it. Each new achievement of biomedical science poses the question of whether we should do what we now know we can do.
Different answers to this question emerge from diverse perspectives, based on initial assumptions that are often neither provable nor refutable in a definitive manner. In a pluralistic society such as ours, this diversity is abundantly clear with regard to issues involving reproductive technologies, genetics, cloning, and stem cell research. Cultural and religious differences often trigger disagreement about governmental policies on these topics. The disagreements are accentuated when relevant research findings are reported only scantily or simplistically by the media, which tend to focus on controversial rather than substantive aspects of the issues addressed. All too frequently, moreover, media coverage exacerbates unrealistic public expectations that the research is likely to lead soon to exciting cures of...