Skip to content

Dominic Wilkinson’s Posts

Viability and the abortion debate – what really matters?

MPs in the House of Commons will debate tomorrow whether the cut-off for legal abortions in the UK should be reduced. Currently abortions are permitted up to the 24th week of a pregnancy, and some MPs have argued that this should be reduced to 20 weeks or below. Advocates and opponents of the change have pointed to scientific evidence about the viability of infants born extremely prematurely at 22, 23 and 24 weeks. They seem to believe that if we can answer the scientific question of whether such infants are viable, that will resolve the question about whether or not abortion is permissible at that stage.
That might be the case if there were a consensus on what viability means, and why it is important in questions about abortion time-limits. But, as this article will highlight, there is no such consensus, and it is not straightforward why viability should matter. So far in this public debate there has been little or no mention of the important questions – what is viability, and why is it important in abortion law?

Read More »Viability and the abortion debate – what really matters?

The viability of fetuses and the abortion debate

A paper has been published online in the British medical journal today
suggesting that survival of extremely premature infants (less than 24
weeks gestation) has not improved in the last decade. This comes less
than a week before a debate in the House of Commons on the Human
Fertilisation and Embryo Authority bill. It has been claimed that this
paper “completely blows out of the water” the arguments of
anti-abortion MPs who hope next week to push for a reduction in the
cut-off for legal abortion (currently 24 weeks).

Read More »The viability of fetuses and the abortion debate

The Apeman and the Scotsman: the slippery slope to humanzees

In the Scotsman this week there is an interview with a scientist who
has claimed that a loophole in the draft UK Human Fertilisation and
Embryology Bill is likely to lead to the creation of hybrid human-apes
or “humanzees”.

In essence this argument is a slippery slope objection to the proposed
changes in the powers of the UK regulatory authority for embryo and
fertilisation research.

Read More »The Apeman and the Scotsman: the slippery slope to humanzees

Football screens and genes: Should genetic discrimination in sport be banned?

In the Guardian this weekend, it is reported that at least one UK football club has been contemplating using genetic tests to screen potential recruits,in the hope of identifying future star players. This comes only one day after legislation was passed in the US Senate prohibiting insurance companies and employers from using genetic information in hiring or insurance decisions.

Read More »Football screens and genes: Should genetic discrimination in sport be banned?

New hope or false hope for vegetative patients?

A BBC documentary screening this evening on the ‘Inside Out’ program reports on what it describes as a breakthrough for patients in a vegetative state. It is based upon research by a group of neuroscientists in Cambridge, who have used sophisticated brain scans (functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)) to look for signs of consciousness in patients who have previously been thought to be completely unaware of their surroundings.

Read More »New hope or false hope for vegetative patients?

Helping human-animals to die

A French woman, Chantal Sebire with a disfiguring and painful terminal
illness recently failed in her appeal for medical assistance to help
her to die. Before her death Chantal Sebire was quoted as saying “We
wouldn’t let an animal go through what I have had to endure”(1).
Euthanasia for animals is commonplace, and is widely accepted as a
morally acceptable response to animals whose suffering is unable to be
relieved. But, with the exception of a few places such as the
Netherlands, Belgium and the US state of Oregon, euthanasia for humans
is legally prohibited.
But is it speciesist to make a distinction between animal and human
euthanasia? In the case of terminally ill humans who request medical
assistance in dying we may have more reasons to permit euthanasia than
in the case of animals. If the arguments against euthanasia are so
forceful that it should not be permitted even in tragic cases like that
of Chantal Sebire should animal euthanasia be prohibited?

Read More »Helping human-animals to die

Adoption and the golden rule

In a recently published book, ‘When the Bough breaks’, Julia Hollander
describes her difficult decision to give up her severely disabled
daughter Imogen to foster care. Her decision has been roundly
criticised by some, who have described her choice as ‘selfish’ and
‘monstrous’.

We have good reason to admire parents who are able to care for children
like Imogen. The challenges that they face are enormous, and the
personal sacrifices that they make are often extraordinary. But should
we demand parents sacrifice their own interests, those of their other
children and their partners? What weight should we put on the interests
of future children – who would not be born if the parents continue to
care for this child?

Read More »Adoption and the golden rule

Methuselah’s planet: the population cost of longer life

Ageing is a mysterious process. There is a good deal of ongoing research aimed at trying to understand its biological cause, though much remains unknown. Some research is aimed at trying to unlock longevity, for example a study published this week that found a particular gene mutation in a group of long-living Ashkenazi Jews. Other researchers are actively looking at rare diseases like progeria which lead to accelerated ageing. It is often expressed that such research will make it possible to extend the normal human lifespan.

But should we try to make our lives longer? In an era of increasing environmental awareness, when the costs of human overpopulation are all too clear it might be argued that the planet cannot support a significant increase in our lifespan.

Read More »Methuselah’s planet: the population cost of longer life

Doublethink and double effect; donation after cardiac death

In California a transplant surgeon has been charged with a felony in relation to the death in intensive care of a young disabled man (Ruben Navarro). (See also Matthew Liao’s blog from yesterday). Ruben had a severe degenerative disorder of the nervous system known as adrenoleukodystrophy, and had then suffered further brain damage after a respiratory arrest. The surgeon is accused of administering drugs to hasten Ruben’s death so that his organs could be used for transplantation. In the event Ruben’s death took some 8 hours after removal of life support, and none of the organs could be used.

What happened after Ruben Navarro’s life support was removed remains unclear. However this case highlights some of the problems of conflicting intentions when patients are allowed to die.

Read More »Doublethink and double effect; donation after cardiac death

Post-mortem punishment and public dissection.

A television report aired in the US last week claimed that bodies used
in public anatomical exhibitions might have included executed Chinese
prisoners. There have been subsequent denials from exhibitors that any
of the bodies currently being shown in Pittsburgh came from prisoners.
Apparently one exhibition includes bodies of individuals who died from
natural causes but were ‘unclaimed’, while another exhibition includes
only individuals who have consented to their bodies being used for
education or research. But it is interesting to try to ‘dissect’ the
outcry.

Read More »Post-mortem punishment and public dissection.