Albany Medical Center
 Search
Home / Caring / Educating / Find a Doctor / News / Give Now / Careers / About / Calendar / Directions / Contact
July 29, 2014 | Posted By Lisa Campo-Engelstein, PhD

The goal of the Bill & Miranda Gates Foundation Family Planning program is “to bring access to high-quality contraceptive information, services, and supplies to an additional 120 million women and girls in the poorest countries by 2020 without coercion or discrimination, with the longer-term goal of universal access to voluntary family planning.”  This is an extremely important endeavor and I'm glad that this program is devoting so many resources to achieving its goal. 

MicroCHIPS, a company based in Lexington Massachusetts, is one of the companies/organizations working with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Family Planning program. They are developing a contraceptive chip that can be implanted under a women's skin. The chip, just 20 x 20 x 7 millimetres, would deliver daily dose hormones and could last up to 16 years. The chip will be controlled by remote control so that if a woman decides she wants to become pregnant, she can deactivate the chip. When she wants to resume contraceptive use, she can reactivate the chip.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

July 22, 2014 | Posted By Wayne Shelton, PhD

I recall being a PhD candidate in philosophy in the 1970’s, I often pondered the subject matter of my graduate courses in ethics. I would ask myself, what does any of this have to do with ethics? What are we doing?

As our courses went from Kant to Mill to G.E. Moore to the Emotivists and others, I couldn’t help but have a sense of unreality about the content of what I was learning.

How can we use reason to find a basis for knowing right action? What are the ways we can define right action based on a normative moral theory?

What is the meaning of good? Right? And obligation? Can these terms be defined within a theoretical, substantive moral framework or are they just expressions of feelings and emotions without any cognitive content? If they are more than the latter, what do they mean?

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

July 16, 2014 | Posted By Jane Jankowski, DPS, LMSW

I have been slow to fully embrace the full potential my smartphone. I have a few apps that I use regularly for entertainment or basic information, like weather updates and maps. It’s convenient. I can entertain myself with games or social networking while I wait in lines or for a child to finish theater rehearsals, basketball/ballet/swimming practices. If I look up, most others waiting in parked cars are doing the same thing, a faint blue glow radiating from somewhere below the steering wheel.  Before we had devices to entertain us, we would more than likely spend the minutes talking, person to person. I tend to think person to person is better, after all a pen and ink letter, sharing coffee at a small café table, or a supportive hug must mean more than emoticon symbols. But maybe these tiny pictures can convey the intended emotion and offer a substitute when the real thing must be delayed or is otherwise not possible. Where is the line at which an electronic emotion, or interpretation of feeling is no longer enough? When I first learned that there were suicide prevention apps, I was aghast. Have we lost so much human connectedness that even acute emotional despair is summarized in a miniature touch screen? How can an app provide the essential emergent interventions to a person in such despair that he or she is contemplating suicide? But if this is where our social focus is anyway, and the first place people search when looking for help, perhaps it is not such a bad idea.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

July 14, 2014 | Posted By Bruce D. White, DO, JD

On the very last day of the 2014 legislative session, the New York Senate passed “The Compassionate Care Act” (S.1682-A, Savino) approving the legalization of medical marijuana.  The Assembly had previously passed a companion bill (A.6357-A, Gottfried). The Senate bill has been sent to Governor Cuomo for his signature. The governor endorsed the bill in the legislature, but as of July 4, 2014, has yet to sign it.

New York medical marijuana proponents have been advocating for the availability of cannabis for several years. Neighboring states Connecticut, New Jersey, and Vermont, and 18 other states and the District of Columbia currently allow medical marijuana. However, last minute compromise changes to the New York law will severely restrict access to medical cannabis. In fact, the limitations are so rigid that some might say the bill is a hallow shell, a sham, one designed to appear to allow medical marijuana yet really not. Regardless of how one feels about medical cannabis, to hype the public into believing that marijuana will be available for medical purposes and then establishing barriers to its accessibility that is a fraud. It would be unconscionable to raise the hopes of distressed patients, many suffering with chronic and painful conditions, only to see those hopes dashed.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

July 10, 2014 | Posted By Zubin Master, PhD

Both parts I and II of this blog were originally published as a commentary in the Office of Research Integrity’s Newsletter (http://ori.hhs.gov/newsletters) Volume 22, Number 2, March 2014 and has been reproduced with permission for the AMBI blog.

In Part I, published last month, I discussed my experience organizing and developing a responsible conduct of research (RCR) workshop for stem cell scientists that was held at the Till and McCulloch Meeting in October 2013 as part of Canada’s Stem Cell Network at http://www.stemcellnetwork.ca. In Part 2, I discuss the importance of developing RCR pedagogy that includes both lecture and informational components, and provides ethical cases such that students have a rich understanding of normative, policy, and practical aspects to different RCR topics.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

July 7, 2014 | Posted By John Kaplan, PhD

Imagine that you had just completed a component of an important task that you had worked on for years. Imagine you were a scientist, something that is easy for me because I am. Imagine that you had had an original idea about how something in nature worked. You mustered the available resources and performed some preliminary studies that were supportive that your idea was in fact correct. You spend weeks or months organizing your ideas, your vision, and your preliminary data into a grant proposal and submitted this to a federal agency or private foundation for funding. Imagine further that your grant proposal was viewed favorably by your peers who supported your idea so your grant application was funded. You would be able to support a laboratory and a staff allowing further studies. You and your coworkers execute these experiments over a period of time that is likely to be measured in years.  These studies provide strong support that meets the standards for scientific proof that your idea was in fact correct.

Now you are able to begin the process of writing the scientific paper so that you can tell the world your great idea and studies you have done which provide support that your idea is correct. You and your coworkers, now coauthors, carefully construct the introduction where you explain to the world why you thought what you thought and did what you did. You carefully and in excruciating detail describe exactly how you did the experiments which yielded the data, and how you analyzed the data. You are now able to show the results of those experiments illustrated by carefully generated tables and graphs. You have now reached the point of offering discussion of the significance and importance of this new contribution to the world’s knowledge. Throughout this process you have dutifully acknowledged all of those whose previous work set the stage for your own contribution.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

July 1, 2014 | Posted By Marleen Eijkholt, PhD

Crowdsourcing seems this month’s health care buzzword. It is everywhere. I’ve seen it used in three different health care contexts over the last months: 1) as a means to raise money for treatment, 2) as a means to gain access to treatments, and 3) as a means to help medical diagnoses.  In thinking about these contexts I found myself asking: Would I use it, or would I not? I am curious to hear if you would use the tool of crowdsourcing, after I give my ideas. Please feel free to comment at the end of my post.

What is crowdsourcing?

The dictionary defines crowdsourcing as: “the practice of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people and especially from the online community rather than from traditional employees or suppliers”In my own terms, crowdsourcing is an appeal to the online crowd/public to assist in a specific endeavor, like the above. Crowdsourcing is about ‘power in numbers’.  It could be an appeal to the public to raise money, signatures, or to gather information/expertise. 

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

June 26, 2014 | Posted By Michael Brannigan, PhD

Ethics here, ethics there, ethics nearly everywhere. Welcome to the world of hyphenated ethics: business-ethics, medical, environmental, media, sports, advertising, legal, even military-ethics. With ethics commissions, committees, councils, consultants, certificates, etc., ethics is big business. Just about anyone can claim to be an "ethicist," a term I decried years ago.

Who are these "ethicists"? What qualifies to be one? In my field, health care ethics, the stakes are high. Recommendations regarding right, wrong, and in-between can be matters of life and death. While ethicists disclaim moral expertise, their views carry weight in bureaucratic institutions. We expect them to be competent in the demanding task of moral analysis, with in-depth experience and interpersonal skills.

But are they?

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

June 24, 2014 | Posted By Paul Burcher, MD, PhD

I was recently surprised to read in the New York Times that a woman had undergone a cesarean section despite her refusal to consent to the procedure. The details of the case are not entirely clear from the article, so I do not want what follows to be understood as a specific comment on this case. However, the source of my surprise was my assumption that the ethics of refusal of consent were not in dispute.  The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology has taken a clear position on this: it is not permissible to perform surgery on a patient with decisional capacity without her consent. ACOG’s committee opinion, “Maternal Decision Making, Ethics, and the Law,” strongly discourages even attempting to seek a court order for treatment when a pregnant woman refuses cesarean section, and concludes with the following statement:

Pregnant women's autonomous decisions should be respected. Concerns about the impact of maternal decisions on fetal well-being should be discussed in the context of medical evidence and understood within the context of each woman's broad social network, cultural beliefs, and values. In  the absence of extraordinary circumstances, circumstances that, in fact, the Committee on Ethics cannot currently imagine, judicial authority should not be used to implement treatment regimens aimed at protecting the fetus, for such actions violate the pregnant woman's autonomy. 

This committee opinion gives six strong and compelling arguments for these conclusions, and I will not repeat them here, but I encourage readers to review them.  What I would like to now focus on is the thinking that may lead some physicians to believe it is ethically permissible to override a patient’s autonomous choice.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

June 19, 2014 | Posted By Zubin Master, PhD

By sharing a recent experience in which I delivered a lecture and case at a responsible conduct of research (RCR) workshop for biomedical science trainees, I will comment on why I believe that pedagogy on the RCR, specifically for biomedical scientists, needs two essential ingredients: delivering knowledge/information and providing case-based learning. The art is to determine how much of each element is needed and how to most effectively deliver information on an RCR topic and ensure trainees get the most from the ethical analysis of cases.

Ethics Workshop: Responsible Research Conduct & Misconduct in Stem Cell Research

As part of Canada’s Stem Cell Network at http://www.stemcellnetwork.ca, I had the unique opportunity to organize and present an Ethics Workshop as part of the Network’s annual Till & McCulloch Meetings in October 2013. The workshop was a lecture followed by an interactive ethical case using “The Lab: Avoiding Research Misconduct” video hosted by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) athttps://ori.hhs.gov/thelab. The 50 to 60 workshop attendees were primarily master’s, doctoral, and post-doctoral trainees, and almost all were biomedical researchers working with stem cells. Most attendees had never heard of RCR. Thus, the goals of the workshop were modest and involved introducing attendees to the following: RCR, research misconduct (fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism), the RCR link to scientific retractions, issues of authorship and publication ethics, and Canada’s RCR framework.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our website.

SEARCH BIOETHICS TODAY
SUBSCRIBE TO BIOETHICS TODAY
ABOUT BIOETHICS TODAY
BIOETHICS TODAY is the blog of the Alden March Bioethics Institute, presenting topical and timely commentary on issues, trends, and breaking news in the broad arena of bioethics. BIOETHICS TODAY presents interviews, opinion pieces, and ongoing articles on health care policy, end-of-life decision making, emerging issues in genetics and genomics, procreative liberty and reproductive health, ethics in clinical trials, medicine and the media, distributive justice and health care delivery in developing nations, and the intersection of environmental conservation and bioethics.
TOPICS