Story related to last week's discussion on Being Mortal, re: improving nursing home care:
He Broke the Law to Build a Better Nursing Home – Next
Avenue
Pentagon to Offer Plan to Store Eggs and Sperm to Retain
Young Troops - NYTimes.com
How might the rapid spread of Zika become an ethical concern?
New Weapon to Fight Zika: The Mosquito - NYTimes.com
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/01/31/business/new-weapon-to-fight-zika-the-mosquito.html?emc=edit_th_20160131&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=25414714&referer=
Depression & Pregnancy
Why might this be ethically tricky?
Panel Calls for Depression Screenings During and After Pregnancy - NYTimes.com
Why might this be ethically tricky?
Panel Calls for Depression Screenings During and After Pregnancy - NYTimes.com
Pregnant Women And New Mothers Need Depression Screening
: Shots - Health News : NPR
Here's the link to an interesting article that relates to Dr.B's talk. It is written by an ER physician about how many people died in the past versus how we die today.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/kindness-blog/i-know-you-love-me-now-let-me-die_b_9037652.html
When first reading this article, I started to paint a picture in my head of how things "used to be". This article definitely opened my eyes to the medical world on how we treat elderly patients today. When working in a hospital, one sees things that you simply can't be unseen. I know in my two short years of working there, I've become "emotionally numb" to situations. I'm trained to act and save lives with the hope that the patient will recover later from the blows of cracking ribs and lack of oxygen to the brain.
DeleteThis is such a good article to read, especially following up with Dr. B's lecture.
This goes along with the book being mortal. Where is the fine line between actually living and simply just existing. Many of the elderly today have said they would rather die in their home then be placed in a nursing home. In most cases it is the children of the elderly that put them in the nursing home. Instead of treating them like parents they have become the children themselves and the children believe they know whats best. They fail to consult with the elderly what they want to do with their own life and simply focus on saving or extending their life. Ultimately it should be the decision of the person themselves if they want to exist in a nursing home, or to actually live out their days in their home or however they see fit. They should be treated less like an object or child and more like the adult they are.
DeleteThis article discusses how a large sperm bank in the UK is excluding people from donating sperm because they have one of a long list of diseases like ADHD, Autism, Cystic Fibrosis, etc. The public and especially the people excluded from donating sperm claim that this is Eugenics but the company is denying it. I believe that by excluding certain people they are actively trying to remove specific genes from the population which I would argue is Eugenics by definition.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bioedge.org/bioethics/london-sperm-bank-allegedly-promoting-eugenics/11730
I would agree that this is Eugenics. However, would it necessarily be a bad thing to have a future with no genetic diseases? Or life threatening diseases? This almost follows along the lines of "genetically modifying embryos"; during the experiments, the idea is to find out what cell causes genetic diseases and attempt to remove it to protect the child's future. I know it may sound a little far fetched, however, I don't think Eugenics is a bad thing...
DeleteIn response to the article on using genetic manipulation on mosquito's to fight the current outbreak of the Zika virus, I have to say that it does make a lot of sense. This approach works by breeding mosquitoes (specifically males, which don't bite) with a gene that kills off their offspring before they can reach adulthood, and releasing them into the wild to breed with the native mosquito population in an effort to reduce it. I think this is an effective and ethically sound approach, as it doesn't harm humans or other forms of wildlife other than the specific breed of mosquito, and lacks the risks of insecticides and the slowness of more traditional methods.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2016/02/01/health/genetically-modified-embryos-dna-uk-scientists/index.html
ReplyDeleteFebruary 1, 2016- British Scientists were given the okay to genetically modify Human Embryos!
This allows scientists to alter DNA of the embryos for research purposes only; it is still illegal (for now) to implant these embryos into women. The extra embryos were donated from women who had extra to spare due to vitro fertilization treatment. These experiments will last seven days on a new embryo, during this time, the embryo expands from one cell to 250 cells. Scientists are worried that in the near future, "designer babies" will come into question but this isn't the goal of the program.
My opinion: I'm excited for this! If continued down a good path, scientists may be able to pin point birth defects and stop them in their tracks.
I feel as if this is a double standard. On one hand, this could help us prevent miscarriages and certain diseases. On the other hand, this could lead to “designer babies,” which is the ability to basically design your child.
DeleteI somewhat agree with Alex, on his comment that this research could be beneficial to preventing diseases and miscarriages. I don’t agree with his comment, “If they continued down a good path.” I wish that this was true, but the reality is that this isn't going to happen. Eventually, designer babies will be a reality. A professor added to this comment in the article. The designer babies are only a matter of time. When designer babies do become a reality, there will be a good number of surgeons/doctors that won’t find any unethical problems with this. They will do it for the money, just like with plastic surgery. This idea is starting on a good path, but it will be corrupted once designer babies are on the scene.
*Personally, I think it is morally wrong to design your baby. Babies are gifts and should be treated as such. I do like the idea of being able to prevent birth defects and miscarriages. Miscarriages hit home with me, because they tend to run in my family. It would be nice if once I am married and pregnant, that I don’t have to worry about losing my child early on.
-Zai Johns
In response to the mosquito article I feel this will become an ethical concern when the scientists throw them out in the world and they begin to harm people. Even though they may be genetically enhanced and have proven to work, what if the mosquitoes adapt? Then we have an epidemic of mosquitoes who can continue to grow in population because they learned how to counteract the poison. I think from a Kant point of view, he would disagree with this because there could be potential harm done to the people. With the potential for the mosquitoes to fight back from adaptation, I think he would be against the idea.
ReplyDeleteThis article is on Physician-Assisted suicide. I think that this article is relevant to our recent class with Dr. Charles Bernstein and how he thought that this type of medical practice would eventually be legal in a lot of states in the next ten years!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-heilig/physicianassisted-dying-h_b_7736606.html
In response to the new weapon to fight the Zika virus, I feel there are many ethical concerns that could arise. The article mentions the use of older methods of mosquito control to prevent the spread of the virus. One such method was the use of DDT which is banned in many counties because of its ecological damage. Not many are looking into this method, but when it comes to saving lives, its use may be reconsidered. Also the fact that scientists don't know what these genetically modified mosquitoes are capable of yet, creates questions of possible ethical concerns in the future. As of now however, this method seems like a very effective way of controlling the spread of the Zika virus.
ReplyDeleteFor the second link posted by Dr. Cate, treating depression during pregnancy can be ethically tricky because the antidepressants might cause fetal harm. According to Kant, every individual is worthy of respect therefore I believe that the fetus, even if it cannot voice it's opinion has a right to be respected by not applying harm, no matter how low the risks. The article states that screening causes so harm and that cognitive behavioral therapy, which is a kind of talk therapy, was helpful to mothers. Treating depression can always be tricky, but when doing it with a pregnancy, people have to be careful and consider the health of the fetus. The mother may also feel threatened if she is being screened and comes back positive for depression and anxiety. This may cause more harm than good and therefore go against the Utilitarian principle. If there is a way to do cognitive behavioral therapy during pregnancy to reduce the risks of depression or feeling vulnerable without it being unethical then why not look into that more rather than giving pregnant women antidepressants that may harm their child.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Megan! Pregnant and postpartum women should be screened for depression, but the action of helping their depression should take place after they have given birth. The fetus should be respected even though they have no voice to state their opinion. After a mother gives birth, they should have a follow up with a professional and sit down with a cognitive behavioral therapy group to talk about how they feel about their new baby.
Deletehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2015/04/04/tech-titans-latest-project-defy-death/
ReplyDeleteThis article I found by the Washington post is about multi millionaire entrepreneurs believe they can extend life through technology. They discuss a plan of action that they believe will help people live much longer than before. They believe they can do this by the use of technology and data. "The entrepreneurs are driven by a certitude that rebuilding, regenerating and reprogramming patients’ organs, limbs, cells and DNA will enable people to live longer and better. The work they are funding includes hunting for the secrets of living organisms with insanely long lives, engineering microscopic nanobots that can fix your body from the inside out, figuring out how to reprogram the DNA you were born with, and exploring ways to digitize your brain based on the theory that your mind could live long after your body expires".
If they pull this off I believe this will be insane. And to be honest I think they will be taking it to far.
A response to the article about Pregnant women and new moms needing more depression screening and treatment,
ReplyDeleteI 100% agree with this article. The article discusses how there have been studies that prove women who are new mothers or still pregnant are at a higher risk for depression. This is overlooked in society today. Birthing a child for most women is a glorious and painful thing. Yet, there are so many changes happening to the woman during pregnancy that suggests that she may become depressed. Lets say a woman gets pregnant. Already, her hormones are changing and raging much like she was going through puberty. A change in hormones this quickly and intense has major side effects on women's overall health. Also, there may be an element of shock to the pregnancy if it was not planned or if the woman did not think it could happen. This shock may be enough to put them in to a downward spiral. The next step is for the woman to experience even more mental and physical changes. Many women, I would say about 95%, have had some trouble or sensitivity about their weight. This is a big factor in being depressed as well. The woman begins to think about the future and her body not being able to recuperate back to what it was. Along with all of these issues, money problems, daddy issues, and other external factors put extra pressure on mothers. Also, child birth is glorious yet sometimes in a sense traumatic. The woman is already scared about her baby's health and their mind races about medical conditions her baby could be born with. The hormones racing inside a pregnant woman are scary in themselves and obviously as statistics show, these can cause depression. Depression is rarely ever treated in new moms as shown by statistics and cases as well. I do not believe in putting women who are pregnant on medication because of the risks associated (disregard extreme cases), but I do believe that therapy can be a big help to these women. Also, once the baby is out the women experience changes to their body and even lack of sleep and these can trigger depressive episodes or even worse mental issues. This is a huge problem in medicine and treatment today and new mothers are seen as heroes who could never have any problems.
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/45225/title/Embryo-Editing-Gets-Green-Light-in-U-K-/
ReplyDeleteThis is a very fascinating short read about the UK's HFEA approving a project that includes the editing of genes in early human embryos. This was passed yesterday on February 1st and I believe that it raises numerous ethical questions about modifying human genomes.
http://www.bioedge.org/mobile/view/euthanasia-continues-to-rise-in-belgium/11735
ReplyDeleteI found a interesting article on how popular euthanasia had become in Belgium. In 2015 alone there were over 2,000 people who resorted to using euthanasia.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/305888.php
ReplyDeleteThis article about overdoses with opioids and how it accidental overdoses maybe influenced by the dosage they are prescribed.
So I found an article that said the Zika virus was declared an emergency. There are still 3400 pregnant women awaiting a diagnosis on the possible birth defects of their children. As far as ethical concerns go,if the mother knows that her child will have a birth defect it could lead her to make an unethical choice regarding to the health of the child, similar to the case with the children with Downs syndrome.
ReplyDeleteHere is the article. I just briefly skimmed it.
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/mobileart.asp?articlekey=193438
With the Zika Virus I feel like it can cause an ethical concern with the mothers who get infected. One of those ethical concerns I feel like would be the mother finding out about the her child being infected before the child is born. The mother then might want to have an abortion if they find out early enough. The doctors would have to honor the mothers wishes even if they don't believe in them. I could see this as something that mothers would do. I have always been a firm believer that things happen for a reason and everything has a reason, you just might not know the reason right now. Mothers would make an unethical decision to abort their child because of the defects Zika presents. Mothers always say that they love their children unconditionally so why not have that same love when the fetus is still in the womb? It will still allow for you to have a great life and will allow for you to experience things in your life that you wouldn't have experienced if it wasn't for having the child.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2016/02/02/health/zika-virus-sexual-contact-texas/index.html
ReplyDeleteThe Zika Virus was confirmed to be transmitted by sexual intercourse from males as of 2/3/16. The CDC states to use protection with any type of sexual contact with males who have visited the region where the Zika Virus is located. The CDC has confirmed a case in Texas. 80% of people with the virus do not show symptoms when infected and only 1 in 5 people actually show symptoms. The Zika virus is in the same family as Yellow Fever, West Nile, Chikingunya, and Dengue Fever.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/can-monkeys-help-unravel-the-mysteries-of-autism/
ReplyDeleteAutism has become a serious problem to people all over the world. This article explains a new technique scientists are using by enhancing baby primates with the autism trait. Scientists have been trying for years to locate new ways to detect or to help treat autism. Chinese scientists have started using a new test subject that has begun to raise eyebrows in America. The idea of human-like primates creates some ethical questions that scientists will have to answer. The scientists that have begun testing in China have found several new helpful things from these gene-enhanced monkeys that can potentially help to treat autism. But is this the right way to do it?
I read the piece about the better nursing home. I love the idea about bringing animals into nursing homes. It gives the elderly something to do and someone to care about. It makes them feel needed and loved. Plus, animals are also great at helping with stress. I wish more people took this initiative. It not only helps the elderly, but it could help abandoned animals find forever homes.
ReplyDeleteBefore my great grandma died this past summer, she was in a nursing home. The nursing home had a talking parrot. I never went to the nursing home, but my family told me how welcoming and warming the parrot was. By having the parrot, the elderly at the nursing home knew they were never alone, because the parrot was always there.
I hope more people join Dr. Thomas’s idea about these nursing homes. Personally, it is a win-win situation. The elderly feel loved and so do the animals/plants. I also like how Dr. Thomas made his nursing homes smaller. I think a big problem is that nursing homes don’t really feel like home. As we discussed in class, they are institutionalized. The times I have been to nursing homes, I felt like I was in prison or a hospital. I couldn’t even imagine living there. By keeping them small, it makes it feel more like a home and helps the elderly walk around, since there isn’t as much of a distance to walk.
In response to the article about Dr. Bill Thomas breaking the law to build a better nursing home, I think it was a great decision. Its sad to see how lonely some elderly are in nursing homes, especially those who don't get visited by family. I can see how bringing in animals and plants can make a huge impact in their lives. They now have something to keep them company and something to spend time caring for. They feel like they have a purpose in life again.
ReplyDeleteWe can see how much of an impact animals have on people here at TMC. Everyone's always excited to see Tommy the campus dog and seeing him walking around campus or getting to pet him can put a smile on anyone's face. Some colleges even bring in animals for students to play with during final exams to relieve some stress.
I also like Dr. Thomas's idea of the Green House. It gives residents privacy by having their own bedroom and bathroom and makes it feel more like home. I think its great that many people are replicating Thomas's ideas in their own institutions and I think ideas like these will help more people to not be afraid of aging and get to enjoy their post-adulthood time more.
http://ww2.kqed.org/futureofyou/2016/02/08/student-was-asked-to-leave-school-because-of-his-dna/
ReplyDeleteReading this article made me very mad. An 11-year old boy was told to leave and transfer schools because he had genetic testing on him when he was little because he was born with a heart condition. During these tests brought a high risk of the boy getting cystic fibrosis but he did not get it. But because the parents told the school in his medical forms about the genetic testing, the school told the family they needed to transfer the boy out of the school because they already have two students that have CF and cannot be too close to another person that has it as well. To be this is horrible and a unethical for people to kick a kid out of school because of a genetic mutation that a kid DOESN'T have. Luckily the parents fought the school in court and won and the kid got to be reinstated back into school, but to kick a kid out of school for a disease he doesn't have and it clearly states that he doesn't have just because he had test on him as a child is unacceptable for the school to put that child out of school and make him feel as if something is wrong with him.
http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016/02/11/zika-virus-infected-journalist-intv-watson-ns.cnn/video/playlists/top-news-videos/
ReplyDeleteHere is a five minute video of the Zika virus. The reporter in the video contracted the virus while reporting live from Haiti. 80% of people who contract the virus show no symptoms. The other 20% have fever, rash, joint pain, and conjunctivitis.
Aight. The whole pentagon wanting to store eggs and sperm is ridiculous. Not only are they playing God, but they are essentially harvesting children to make troops. Don't get me wrong, I'm all about supporting the troops who protect the nation, and I'm super into the "child super soldier" concept found often in SCIENCE FICTION, but once we, as a nation, start allowing this to ACTUALLY happen..:is unacceptable.
ReplyDeleteFor the greater good, yes, it may be. Younger soldiers will yield stronger and more efficient soldiers. But soldiers from birth? Though artificially created, they are still living human beings. They have aspirations. They have wants and needs.
And if we allow this, where does it end? Where does it stop? It's a slippery slope. What comes to mind is the whole "genetically enhanced soldier" concept thatt,
Once again, is only found in science fiction.
But so was the "soldiers bred from birth" concept.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2802935/teaching-assistant-sent-away-catholic-school-arms-neck-covered-tattoos.html
ReplyDeleteHere is an article about a teaching assistant who was sent away on her first day of her new job at a Catholic school because her arms and neck were covered in tattoos. Within an hour of showing up for her first day, she claims she was sent home because of her body art - and she insists she cannot cover up the tattoos in order to return to the school.
Would you allow your kids to be taught by someone who was covered in tattoos in a Catholic School System? Why or why not?
I would allow my children to be taught by someone with tattoos. Just because someone has tattoos doesn't mean they are incapable of doing their job. I understand that the Catholic school system has different rules that the public school system, but no one should be limited into getting something that they like and/or want. I read that for Catholics, the image should not be immoral, such as sexually explicit, Satanic, or in anyway opposed to the truths and teachings of Christianity. The images I saw of her tattoos are not immoral or explicit. She has hearts and bows on her fingers. If children were exposed to tattoos earlier in life and were allowed to ask the people what they mean and did they regret any of them, then maybe they would think before getting one. Personally I saw tattoos when I was younger and I did ask people if they regretted them. Some did and others didn't regret getting something permanent on their body. I have three tattoos, one of which I got when I was 16, but do I regret it? Not a chance, it is part of me and was an experience that I will always have and it tells a story in my life. It will be with me forever and I can use my tattoos to inform others about what all comes with getting a tattoo. I have made the decision to get my tattoos in places that can be covered up because I do understand that it is hard to get a job if people see a tattoo. The times are changing and more people are getting tattoos and soon its going to get to the point in the world that there are few jobs being filled because so many people are not qualified because of a little ink. I think people should consider placement when getting tattoos, but also jobs need to consider that some of the smartest, or would have been best employee was turned down because they had visible ink.
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/bioethics/9904/postmortem.sperm/template.html
ReplyDeleteThis is an article about the ethics of banking sperm from a dead man. The first child was born from a dead man whose sperm was collected after he was deceased. They argue that collecting sperm is no different from collecting organs from a donor but sperm isn't scarce like solid organs. The fundamental nature of parenthood states that it shouldn't be forced on those who don't want to or are not sure. And does it matter if the father is dead?
Should sperm collected from dead men be allowed? Who can decide to collect it, and when should it be used to conceive children? Should a man be forced to become a parent without his consent, and does the fact that he’s dead influence the answer?
I think it should be allowed, but the guy should have a card that states that he is a donor, similar to what organ donors do when they decide to donate their organs. The person should decide before they die if someone can collect their sperm. And if someone likes them as a donor, then they can decide to use that sperm to conceive a child. If he is dead, then I don't think he is really being forced. He has no chance of being forced to care to the child in any means. The women who chose that sperm donor should be fully informed that the donor is dead and therefore there is no way for him to be responsible for the child that she made the choice to have.
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2014/01/08/opinion/rushton-munoz-case/
ReplyDeleteHere's the article about the women who was pronounced brain dead and her husband wants her off the machines but the state will not let it happen because she is 19-weeks pregnant.
"He Broke the Law to Build a Better Nursing Home" was an article that touched me in many ways. My grandmother is in a nursing home and in the past five years her autonomy has plummeted. In this article it was the death rates and the medical costs that plummeted. When I grow old I would definitely want to be in a garden rather than a nursing home whether I am in a wheel chair or not.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nextavenue.org/he-broke-the-law-to-build-a-better-nursing-home/
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/11/151109103725.htm
ReplyDeleteHere is an interesting article about how the wealthiest typically have an edge over the sickest in organ transplants.