It was bound to happen. Last week, Nature reported that a Hungarian company “certified” that a member of parliament did not haveJewish or Roma heritage. It seems we have not come very far at all from the hatreds and behaviors that led to the Nazi atrocities of the 1930s and 1940s. But, of course, 70 years is the merest blip compared to 10,000 or more years of fear of the other.

Is this a problem of science as such? Or is it a problem related to what it means to be a human being, that notorious “riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”? Or is this virulent distortion of scientific progress merely what can be expected when the fruits of scientific research are placed in human hands? Modern science was born, asserts Hannah Arendt in her essay The Concept of History, when attention shifted from the search after the “what” to the investigation of “how”. Historically, science was concerned with exploring the natural world. Scientists such as Aristotle categorized, catalogued, and examined phenomena. The overall goal was to improve understanding of man’s place in creation. Investigation of the “how” was activity of an entirely different sort. Now scientists began to pull things apart in attempts to understand how things work.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.

Does the case for terminal sedation actually weaken the case against physician-assisted suicide?

Terminal sedation, more clinically referred to as "palliative sedation," is a legally sanctioned alternative to physician-assisted suicide, a last resort in palliative treatment. It involves inducing and maintaining unconsciousness in a terminally ill patient until the patient dies, and is often accompanied by withholding or withdrawing medical feeding and hydration.

For example, if, in my advanced cancer, I experience intolerable pain, delirium, dyspnea or distress, to alleviate these unmanageable symptoms I let my physician sedate me into unconsciousness until I die. Sort of like undergoing anesthesia before surgery, without waking up.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.

We (in America) live in a capitalist society. That is a given. We also live in a democratic society. The Declaration of Independence states that all men [humans] are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is not clear that any of these specific rights can be fulfilled when access to a minimum standard of health care is denied, obstructed, or otherwise not available. In the case when health care is available, that care needs to be delivered stripped of any considerations other than those related to providing assistance for that patient.

But in America many ancillary considerations intervene. Care of a patient is confounded by care for special interests, often involving kickbacks (whether in the form of travel expenses, gifts, complimentary lunches and dinners, or even cash payments) rendered by obsequious agents of big pharma or medical device corporations. Worse, on a broader scale, the recent phenomenon of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) blithely granting biomedical patents to any and all comers has seriously harmed medical practice and the health of Americans in need.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.

Last week's historic three days of arguments before the Supreme Court on the merits of the Affordable Care Act provided many head-scratching moments. Those naive enough to believe that the case was actually going to be considered on constitutional grounds (this being the Supreme Court, after all) were rudely awakened to an apparent actual agenda of partisan politics and corporate interests.

Broccoli was a key theme, startling the 50 million Americans who may be able to purchase green vegetables at the local market but are unable to purchase badly needed health insurance. The welfare of health insurers was a second prominent theme, providing concrete evidence to those who posit that our nation is no longer a government of the people, but rather a "government of the corporation".

The outrage has been profound, including Op-Ed pieces in The New York Times, featured articles in The New Yorker, and commentary in the New England Journal of Medicine.

First, the produce. During the second day of arguments, Justice Scalia attempted to define the market for health care. He said ". . . you define the market as food, therefore everybody is in the market; therefore, you can make people buy broccoli." Chief Justice Roberts picked up the theme as easily as if he were choosing a ripe cantaloupe at his local farm stand. Roberts informed us that "a car or broccoli aren't purchased for their own sake, either." Broccoli is purchased to cover the need for food, we were sagely advised.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.

It has been a very busy week at the Supreme Court. Three days of arguments on the various challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act each merited front-page coverage in The New York Times. SCOTUSblog, the blog of the Supreme Court, received more than 800,000 hits in three days, which was more than the site has received in its first 4 years of existence. Regardless of the court's final ruling (expected on June 28th), the active engagement in our robust democratic politics of so many Americans and interested parties worldwide bodes well for the future of our way of life. Separation of powers, first described and promulgated by John Adams (second president of the United States) in his treatise, Thoughts on Government, Applicable to the Present State of the American Colonies, is alive and well.

It's easy to experience the ebbing of America's power. Our national political scene is a toxic partisan shambles. We have been severely depleted — our blood and treasure have been unthinkingly squandered in 10 years of geopolitically useless war in Iraq and Afghanistan. We are beset by real threats to our welfare and continued existence . . .

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.

On Monday, March 26th, 2012, the Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments on National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius and two linked cases, the lawsuits against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA; signed into law by President Obama on 3/23/2010). The court announced on February 21st that it would hear 6 hours of arguments over 3 days, an historic and unprecedented amount of time. The last time the Supreme Court heard more than 2 hours of arguments was when it considered the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law in 2003.

At issue in the cases before the Supreme Court is the constitutionality of federal involvement, interference, or interposition (depending on who's doing the interpreting) regarding activities of private citizens and activities of the states. The question of constitutionality of the ACA relates specifically to the Commerce Clause (U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3). The Commerce Clause states "Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes". As with all clauses of the Constitution, the Commerce Clause must be interpreted and applied. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter and interpreter of all such applications, declaring the constitutionality (or lack thereof) of congressional and state legislation.

The challenges to the ACA state that the federal government has exceeded its constitutionally enumerated powers. The Tenth Amendment states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The challenges suggest that the ACA attempts to wield a federal power that does not exist under the Constitution and attempts to interfere with powers appropriately "reserved" to the states and to "the people". The challenges assert that it is the right of a citizen, rather than a prerogative of the federal government, to determine whether she will purchase health insurance. The challenges also assert that the federal government cannot dictate how a state conducts its Medicaid program.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.

Contraception, women's rights, and religious freedom have dominated the headlines in recent weeks. New guidelines require new health insurance plans to fully cover women's preventive health services, including the provision of birth control pills without co-payments. The administration estimates that by 2013, 34 million American women aged 18 to 64 will receive the benefits specified in the new ruling. Naturally (also, sadly), considering that this is the United States, a firestorm of ill-will began gathering in response. Lately the anti-contraception forces have been in full cry.

The rights of women to a full range of preventive health services are the main concern of the new guidelines. Women's health requirements are not the same as those of men. Also, if we take a breath and step back from this latest manifestation of America's highly destructive "culture war", we might notice that this entire argument could be avoided by instituting a single-payer health care system.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.

What does it mean to live in a democracy? In the United States, various freedoms are enumerated in the Bill of Rights. These precious freedoms include freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of assembly. The Fourth Amendment provides protection against unreasonable search and seizure. The Ninth Amendment states "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

A critical question is whether the "liberty" protected by the Due Process Clause includes the right to health care.

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.

Last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius overruled the decision of Food and Drug Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg to allow the wider availability of Plan B One-Step® (levonorgestrel, Teva Women’s Health, Inc.) without a prescription to all women of child-bearing age, more specifically to adolescent girls under age 17. This was the first time that a health secretary has ever publically exercised statutory authority to reverse an FDA commissioner. Moreover, Secretary Sebelius was fully supported by President Obama in this action.

However, today’s headline – “Sebelius: Decision to keep Plan B age restrictions not political” – is difficult to believe. Particularly, when Plan B decisions have almost always been political. See here and here.

It’s difficult when a career politician dismisses the professional advice of experts and claims that the decision did not involve political considerations. But what gives credence to the Secretary’s stand is: (1) her pro-choice positions as governor of Kansas, (2) the fact that she’s facing considerable opposition from well-known Democratic leaders around the country, and (3) her willingness to reconsider the issue if the manufacturers of Plan B reapply with additional data about the “significant cognitive and behavioral differences between older adolescent girls and the youngest girls of reproductive age.”

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.

Donor gamete regulation is an ongoing topic in the United States. What's so special about gametes that causes us to be concerned about their commodification? Commodification itself is not a bad thing. In free societies, supply-and-demand relationships precisely determine prices.

Should a woman be allowed to sell her ova in the same manner as she might sell other services related to her body, such as modeling or in the performing arts? Are there differences between an egg and the collection of cells and tissues that comprise her physical form?

The real issues do not relate to commodification, but rather concern protecting both buyers and sellers. We should also be worried about the interests of children, and the impact on our society of a market which explicitly places a higher price on “whiteness”, “tallness”, “Ivy League–ness”, and so on. If commodification is not an issue, why set a limit on prices?

The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers graduate online masters in bioethics programs. For more information on the AMBI master of bioethics online program, please visit the AMBI site.