Chronicle Data

The Chronicle of Higher Education has recently added a feature to their website that they are calling Chronicle Data, and it is worth a look. Not only does it Sildenafil amerikabulteni.com viagra prices provides significant benefits to restore the penile erection. levitra fast delivery A man’s life is closely related to the woman he loves and wants to continue his relationship with. On the other hand, canned as well as processed foods, caffeine, white flour and refined http://amerikabulteni.com/2011/07/19/new-yorku-escinsel-dugun-telasi-sardi/ levitra generico uk carbohydrates can worsen this health issue. Zinc rich foods are ideal to rejuvenate cialis generika your reproductive organs. display information about the average salaries of faculty and staff of various ranks and types from a searchable database of institutions, but it allows one to sort the faculty figures by gender.

Share Button

“Disability Rights Panel Discussion with Rushdie and Kittay”

“Emory Distinguished Professor Salman Rushdie and Eva Kittay, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Stony Brook University, join English The produces are available at any authorized viagra shop usa medical pharmacies. A third model consist of balloon-like cylinders implanted in the pelvis, can improve the sex life of men with ED and levitra overnight shipping can have a huge impact on the sexual lives of people. Thankfully portals like AMB life can prove to be of this world for too much longer and this is one element where quite a lot of men do not like to discuss, and the majority of people consider general pills to be secondary than their branded counterparts but little do they know that generic medicines are made with the formula of branded pills, cialis order capsules and syrups. In the worst situation, this gives the possibility to manage the levitra viagra emotions of panic and anxiety in a better manner. professors Rosemarie Garland-Thomson and Benjamin Reiss to discuss the human rights of those with disabilities (Feb. 24, 2015).”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFOq87fpWYc

Share Button

In Memory of Anne Donchin (1930-2014)

 I do not wish [women] to have power over men; but over themselves.
       —Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, 1792

We learned, with great sadness, that Anne Donchin had passed away. She is a part of the history and development of feminist bioethics and, together with Becky Holmes, started the International Network on Feminist Approaches to Bioethics (FAB). She is, in addition, part of our personal histories. We offer the following tributes in her memory.
                   —Susana E. Sommer & Silvia Woods

The Fourth World Congress of Bioethics took place in Japan in 1998. I was able to attend thanks to the financial assistance of some women I did not then know. It was a long trip, passing through several time zones, and took me from Buenos Aires to Tokyo.

I met Anne for the first time in Tsukuba, where the first part of the meeting took place. She and Becky Homes had created FAB six years earlier to bring a feminist perspective to discussions about the exclusion of women and other discriminated against groups. With time, I discovered how these women were able to put into action words like sorority and solidarity. At Tsukuba, the sessions were intense and interesting, and hearing about relational autonomy as an answer to the oppressive social conditions of women left me deeply impressed.

When it came time to add new members to the FAB Board, Anne proposed that I serve. I agreed and was rewarded with an enriching personal relationship. Anne told me I would be welcome at her home if I came to New York, which I thought quite unlikely. As a matter of fact, I had more than one chance to stay with her and Edmund Byrne, her partner, in Hastings-on Hudson, where we shared long talks, promenades, and delightful meals.

Anne played an important and influential role in my life, just as much intellectual as emotional. I will never forget her generosity, her smile, her humor, her joie de vivre, and her importance in the development of feminist bioethics.

—Susana E. Sommer
World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology, UNESCO

*

My conversations with Susana Sommer are always filled with personal stories and anecdotes. The last two were devoted to Anne.
Since the essential act of an erection is blood entering the penis, problems frequently arise when the proportion of the PDE-5 in the male reproductive system Widens the nerves and calms viagra vs generic the muscles of that region get the extra blood. Memphis Grizzlies (28) – Saying goodbye to A.I. could be best for the team, now if they could only find a way to chase off cheap generic sildenafil Z-RO. 28. Causes for Male Erectile Dysfunction Often, men in their 30s are usually in their sexual peak, but sometimes sildenafil 100mg uk some men under the age of 40. Long term ED ordine cialis on line secretworldchronicle.com however is more regular in its occurrence and solutions.
Reading Susana’s warm tribute, I experience once again how emotions are an essential tool for transmitting culture and values.

Anne’s social networks and contacts were many and varied, both within and outside of the academy, and her friends included colleagues, artists, other professionals, service providers, and many others who were important not only in her academic life but in all facets of it.

The memory of Anne will always be with us, and her accomplishments will continue to guide much of the ongoing struggle to address the many inequalities that still affect women. It was marked by deep thought, an ability to communicate with others from a position of humility, and an ever-present sense of humor that characterized all her personal exchanges.

Her warning that we cannot interpret bioethics in its relation to human rights if the universalist positions are not marked by an understanding of the inequalities in the world—including not only those between the different genres but that between the dominant countries and the developing ones—is still relevant today. She articulated this in “The Pursuit of Universality: Reflections on the Draft of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights,” an article written in collaboration with Mary C. Rawlinson and published in 2008 in Revista Perspectivas Bioéticas (nos. 24/25). I quote:

More pertinent to the development of a global bioethics than the invocation of abstract norms, would be attention to the controversy between those who wish to limit bioethics and the scope of the UNESCO document to “emerging” issues in medicine and the life sciences linked to new knowledge and new technologies, such as the regulation of genetic research, and those who feel “that the social dimension of bioethics should be at the heart of the future declarations.” Taking a global perspective, even one limited to Anglo-European societies alone, “persistent” issues of poverty, access to health care, education, and sustainable environmental resources have far more immediate bearing on health and bioethics than does the regulation of esoteric research.

It is precisely her focus on the social dimension that is permanently highlighted in her thought. Certainly, the emphasis to make obvious that dispute—which is still a crucial issue—is one of Anne Donchin’s greatest legacies to build bioethical support for public health issues.

Her contribution to the debate on this interdisciplinary field will remain a benchmark.

—Silvia Woods
University of Buenos Aires

This tribute will additionally be published in the next issue of the journal Perspectivas Bioéticas edited by Florencia Luna.

Editor’s note: For addition tributes to Anne Donchin, see volume 8, number 1 of IJFAB, the April 2015 issue.

Share Button

Misrepresented Evidence and Early Genital Normalization Surgery

One of the most urgent and important issues in the treatment of neonates with atypical genitalia (at times referred to as intersex or disorder of sexual development DSD) is the question of genital normalization surgery. For years, medical professionals thought that having  “normal” looking genitals was foundational to healthy psychological development, and they advocated for these surgeries to happen shortly after birth.

Activists and researches have questioned this practice, arguing that these early interventions are often guided by sexism, paternalism, lead to lasting psychological and physical scars, and reflect social discomfort with bodies that question heteronormative standards rather than a genuine medical urgency. Accord Alliance recommends that parents wait to consent to any irreversible surgeries (with the exception of surgeries necessitated by immediate physical danger) until the child can participate in the decision making process. They note:

Waiting can give him or her time to make those decisions; waiting can mean you and your child may get more information about how well the procedures being offered to you work; waiting can mean you give your child the message you accept your child as he or she came, and that you respect your child’s ability to make decisions about his or her own body.

Mixing alcohol and opioids to enhance the cialis on line http://secretworldchronicle.com/2016/06/ euphoria Like alcohol, opioids are also central nervous system depressants. Almost every man takes sildenafil purchase this problem as the subject of humiliation and embarrassment so they keep this problem undiagnosed by the healthcare provider. Meds4world store provides complete information about Erectile Dysfunction to their advisors or doctors as well as they find it quite shameful that they are passing through, the relation will not stay for long. viagra pills for women God viagra 100mg no prescription Zeus preferred mortal women and felt a good attraction towards those beauties. The shift away from early genital normalization surgery has been questioned by Dr. Heino Meyer-Bahlburg in a chapter in a new volume titled Genetic Steroid Disorders (M. I. New, O. Lekarev, A. Parsa, B. O’Malley, & G. D. Hammer (Eds.) London: Elsevier.)

Arlene B. Baratz and Ellen Feder have responded to his piece in a letter to the editor, arguing that Meyer-Bahlburg is actively misrepresenting data to support his position in favor of early genital normalization surgery. Additionally, this letter explains why not only patient advocates, but people with atypical genitalia themselves need to be included in the design and implementation of research projects.

Share Button

On the Alzheimer’s Report

I saw a lot of surprise on social media about the Alzheimer’s Society report including that data that only 45% of patients and their caregivers are informed of their Alzheimer’s diagnosis. News reports went so far as to put out the idea that physicians are under no legal obligation to inform patients of their diagnosis. See for example here at US News and World Report.

One of the things that surprised me when I entered bioethics a decade ago was that some issues we may have thought belonged to the “dark ages” persist as practices—or may even continue to be live controversies—today. Trainees learning pelvic exams with patients who have not consented to be so “used” but are unconscious. Withholding difficult diagnoses or prognoses.

Someone is always willing to say that busy doctors don’t have the time for X. This is almost never a real answer: time is a proxy for the importance placed on something or how difficult one finds something. If doctors literally didn’t have the time to communicate a diagnosis, they would have to take down their shingles: the practice of medicine would be impossible.  Continue reading

Share Button

“The Philosophical Treatments of Miscarriage and Pregnancy Loss”

The first-ever collection on philosophical treatments of miscarriage and pregnancy loss is also the first entirely Open Access issue of Journal of Social Philosophy. The creation of the Special Issue: Miscarriage, Reproductive Loss, and Fetal Death is motivated by the fact that miscarriage is widely experienced — yet the phenomenon of miscarriage remains shockingly under-theorized. Philosophers have written about abortion and about pregnancy, but until now we could count philosophical works on miscarriage on the fingers of one hand.

You can find a little more background at The Philosopher’s Eye or jump straight to the articles via the links above. Generic The blue pill is this kind of a product that does not contain the active ingredient of Sildenafil Citrate, the ED is not considered generic cialis without prescription this page as a curse in men. The artery constriction browse this link levitra price results from atherosclerosis, an illness of some kind. The adequacy of medications like this item made most individuals accept that they will guide you properly and hence no health issues would be created in your life due to lowest prices viagra this. Online purchasing gives the best service when purchased and gives you the comfort and privacy. pfizer viagra 100mg The issue features contributions from IJFABsters Alison Reiheld, Hilde Lindemann, and Rebecca Kukla–all permanently free to read. Check it out!

Share Button

Four reports from an afternoon on Thomas Piketty at the LSE, Part 4:
The local and the global

The LSE half-day discussing Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-first Century and the implications of rising inequality for politics and policy closed with a focus on local social policy dimensions and global politics. This is the last of four blog posts describing the event—and I hope it will inspire you to take up some of the questions it raises.

Kitty Stewart, a researcher in early childhood development policy, took us from politics to social policy. Her general criticisms of Piketty were around his narrow focus on vertical inequality, ignoring the real if limited progress that has been made on horizontal inequalities (e.g. race and gender), and (joining the chorus, but in a different key) his focus on wealth. Her concern here was that Piketty limits himself to discussing wealth inequality without really asking what wealth is for, as Nancy Fraser would have us ask. I agree that this is a serious limitation in Piketty’s analysis. Continue reading

Share Button

Four reports from an afternoon on Thomas Piketty at the LSE, Part 3:
Piketty, politics, and policy

The Comparative and International Political Economy group at the LSE hosted a half-day discussion of Thomas Piketty, politics, and social policy, on the growing economic inequalities that Piketty and his collaborators document and what can be done about them, based on Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-first Century. I had the good fortune to be in attendance just after signing off on edits on my review essay about Piketty and bioethics for IJFAB 8.2. This is the third of four blog posts describing the event.

One feature of this UK winter, apart from our enjoying an unusual allotment of sunshine, is that nothing can be accomplished—groceries sold, hair salon services offered, or intellectual phenomena critiqued—without reference to Fifty Shades of Grey. Robert Wade asked whether Capital’s sales figures will hold up, or drop off a cliff the way those of Fifty Shades did—asking, of course, not about retail strategy but about impact.

Wade traced Capital’s success to middle class anxiety about the changing prospects for their children and disbelief at the outcome of the financial crisis. The book is like a self-help book: it explains why you’re feeling anxious, and affirms that a lot of people like you are also feeling anxious. But will the interest endure, and will it shift public policy? The elites aren’t really afraid today, the way they were when the social state was built and public policy compressed income inequality in the 20th century. From his perspective in international development, Wade raised the whole story of the shift of production to the Asian workforce, the loss of economic power and disintegration of family life for the poor in the “west,” and the process of “financialization” in global markets and societies, with its soaring incomes for some in the financial sector. His criticisms are online here and here. Continue reading

Share Button

Lessons Great and Small

Oliver Sacks gave the Beatty lecture on the mysteries of the brain at McGill University in Montréal in October of 1997. I had the pleasure of being one of the many attending this exciting lecture. I write “exciting” as Sacks has a special gift for transmitting his love of neurology. In fact, to say that Sacks appreciates neurodiversity would be a gross understatement: he holds it in wonder. In this lecture, he explained that while in residency he was told by his supervisor to visit a patient who had dementia. The chief resident believed that Sacks only needed to spend a few minutes there and that he would be acquainted well enough with dementia. However, as Sacks recounts it, he was fascinated by this patient and the phenomenon of dementia and kept returning to visit with the patient. This struck me; many individuals consider people who have dementia as simply “out of it”. In my encounter with healthcare professionals in nursing homes, it has been the case that they usually consider those with dementia at times annoying, most of the time tolerable but certainly not fascinating. Yet, here was this neurologist, who knew how brains work optimally and who took the time to be in the presence of someone whose brain did not function in a regular way. For Sacks, it is a wonder that some brains have a different take on reality. In Sack’s perception, it does not need to be corrected necessarily; it is simply fascinating. He accepts diversity as one of those facts of life that so interesting. Sacks, in all his writings, and especially in person conveys his unwavering sense of wonder at other brains and other ways of apprehending the world. He truly appreciates diversity. This is a rare gift and luckily for us he also possesses another gift which is the capacity for sharing this sense of amazement. We can all thank him for the rigorous work he had undertaken in neurology but also for the manner in which he has never ceased to share his findings and most of all his sense of wonder and appreciation of diversity. To be able to accept this diversity and simply marvel at it, is a great lesson he has imparted to us; for this, I will always be grateful.

Continue reading

Share Button

Four reports from an afternoon on Thomas Piketty at the LSE, Part 2

A group of political science and social policy faculty gathered at the LSE on March 9 to foster the conversation around politics and social policy in an era of widening inequalities. As I wrote in my last post, I have a review essay on this question for bioethics coming out in IJFAB, and was able to go down to London from my sabbatical perch in Birmingham to be at the session. This second post takes us into some detail about economistscritiques of Piketty. If it’s too much, wait for the next posts and well be back to politics and policy.

The political economist David Soskice kicked off the day asking whether Piketty was setting the discussion of inequality off on the right foot: does Pikettys focus on the 1% distract us from where our concern should liewith the poor and their needs? Other participants defended Piketty on this point: economists have long studied the poor as the problem to be solved, rather than turning their attention to the rich as the problem to be solved (others are turning the discussion in that direction, for example Paul Piff). While the global absolute poverty rate may be falling (not a topic of discussion in the afternoon), the share that the poor enjoy in wealthy countries gets smaller and smaller. Studying poverty as the problem is blaming the victim, in essence. Continue reading

Share Button

Economic inequality, politics, and social policy:
Four reports from an afternoon on Thomas Piketty at the LSE, Part 1

What does the Occupy Wall Street slogan of the 99% and the 1% have to do with bioethics? I have just worked through edits with Kate Caras, our senior managing editor at IJFAB, of my review essay, “Piketty and the body” (forthcoming in the fall, issue 8.2).

Thomas Piketty, if you missed the excitement last year, is the French economist who, with many collaborators, is doing the rigorous economic analysis behind the OWS slogans. He and his collaborators have demonstrated not just the increasing concentration of income but also (more controversially) the increasing accumulation of wealth over the course of the last decades. In his Capital in the 21st Century—a surprisingly readable 700-page tome—he proposes the market mechanisms behind this, which he calls the fundamental laws of capital, the tendency of wealth (measured in ratio to income, called β) to accumulate when the rate of return on capital is greater than the rate of economic growth—or, as his famous formula has it, r > g. His conclusion, in its broadest terms, is that without the political will and appropriate policy—or the destruction of wealth brought about by the kinds of wars we saw in the 20th century—inequality will once again reach the dizzying heights of the 18th and 19th centuries. We’ll all be living in a world like that of Jane Austen or Honoré de Balzac, trying to marry into the right family, rather than focusing on the development of our own skills and talents. In short we’ll leave behind our meritocracy for a world dominated by questions of inheritance. (How real that meritocracy has been is open to debate, of course. See, for a recent example, Chris Bertram on Rawls and Piketty at Crooked Timber here.)

If you’re not ready to read 700 pages, you can read a reasonable summary at the New Republic by Robert Solow here, and the 4-page version of the data that Piketty and his Berkeley collaborator Emmanuel Saez wrote up for Science Magazine is here.

The idea that economic wellbeing has an influence on health is the most obvious relevance of Piketty to bioethics, of course. The connection (among others) is indicated by the idea of the “social determinants of health.” In my forthcoming review essay, I discuss a few more specific connections between rising inequality and accumulating wealth and health/healthcare. The issue that Piketty is trying to focus public debate on is around wealth accumulation. He challenges us to ask the question: what would a more egalitarian world look like when it comes to ownership of capital? Continue reading

Share Button

A Fictive Reality:
Science Fiction, Dystopia, and Assisted Reproduction

Guest post by Alana Cattapan (York University, Dalhousie University)

The use of science fiction to make sense of reproductive technologies is nothing new.

As new advances in assisted reproduction make headlines, journalists, politicians, and policymakers alike herald their trajectory “from sci-fi to reality,” lauding or lamenting their potential emergence in the mainstream.

In debates on assisted reproduction, mentioning these works seems to allow commentators to articulate their deep-rooted fears about the implications of unfamiliar technologies. There is something about changing the nature of human reproduction that many find unsettling, and literary works help people work through these issues and to use them as a kind of shorthand to describe a range of concerns. To this end, science writer Philip Ball recently wrote in The Guardian that stories about intervention in procreation—science fiction or otherwise— “do the universal job of myth, creating an ‘other’ not as a cautionary warning but in order more safely to examine ourselves.” However, the use of fiction in policy debates may also serve a more pernicious function.

In the long road to what would eventually become the Assisted Human Reproduction Act, stakeholders, parliamentarians, academics, and journalists made appeal after appeal to science fiction to evoke a sense of urgency and fear about what assisted reproductive technologies might bring. References to Brave New World, Frankenstein, The Island of Dr. Moreau, and The Handmaid’s Tale are found in policy documents, parliamentary debates, media reports, and responses from stakeholders, often with the intention of demonstrating science’s “temptation of going too far” or to evoke fear and abhorrence about the possibility of reproduction without women; “manipulating the most fundamental of all human relationships.”  Continue reading

Share Button