Skip to content

The Cost of Non-Cash Incentives for Organs

The Cost of Non-Cash Incentives for Organs

The Times newspaper featured an editorial proposing changes in the organ procurement system last week by Sally Satel, a scholar from the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. I thought the first few lines were especially revealing about Satel’s attitude to market transactions – she reports that she desperately needed a kidney herself, but dreaded “the constricting obligation that would surely come with accepting” an altruistic donation. She therefore “wished [she] could buy a kidney just to avert the emotional debt.”

Read More »The Cost of Non-Cash Incentives for Organs

A costly separation between withdrawing and withholding treatment

by Dominic Wilkinson

Television child star Gary Coleman died recently following a severe brain haemorrhage. He was taken to an intensive care unit, but the next day was taken off life support because of the severity of his brain injury.

Decisions like the one made by Gary Coleman’s doctors are common in intensive care. Many deaths follow decisions to stop intensive treatment because it is believed to have no chance of succeeding or because of the burden of illness even if the treatment does work. One question raised about cases like these is about the importance (or risks) of living wills. A separate question (and one that was raised during the critical care grand round earlier today) is about the difference between stopping treatment and failing to start treatment.

Read More »A costly separation between withdrawing and withholding treatment

Against Equality

by Julian Savulescu

Equality is an ideal born of the vice of envy, one of the seven deadly sins. But equality has no intrinsic value and panders to our vicious nature to be envious of others. Levelling down is absurd. And why level up if we can raise everyone, improving all of their lives instead of just some? To reduce people’s envy of others, when their own lives are good and better? That is no reason.

Read More »Against Equality

Critical Care ethics grand round

by Dominic Wilkinson

Today I gave a talk at the John Radcliffe Medical Grand Round on Advance Directives and treatment withdrawal decisions in intensive care – based on a case I was involved in last year.

A middle-aged patient presents with acute respiratory failure, and is intubated and transferred to the intensive care unit. After admission he improves, but it transpires that he has a progressive neurodegenerative disorder and has previously expressed a wish not to have intensive life support measures provided.

Read More »Critical Care ethics grand round

Drugs in sport debate: Proposer’s update

by Julian Savulescu

So far, there has been no debate. I agree entirely with nearly all John William’s points.

The topic is “Performance Enhancing Drugs Should Be Allowed in Sport.” It is not “All Performance Enhancing Drugs Should Be Allowed in Sport.” I have argued that some should according to certain criteria, including being consistent with the spirit of that particular sport.

Read More »Drugs in sport debate: Proposer’s update

Religion, Tolerance and Intolerance Conference resources available online

The AHRC-Funded 'Science and Religious Conflict' Project team here at Oxford (www.src.ox.ac.uk) is pleased to announce that resources from our recent conference on 'Religion, Tolerance and Intolerance', held at Oxford  17-19 May are now available online at http://www.bep.ox.ac.uk/archive_events_data/religion_and_tolerance_conference_may_2010 This includes audio files of all talks, and several PowerPoint presentations.The audio files are also available as podcasts from… Read More »Religion, Tolerance and Intolerance Conference resources available online

Whether to die, or when to die? The distinction between assisted suicide and ‘aid in dying’

Assisted suicide is illegal in the state of Connecticut. But two doctors have sought to circumvent the law by requesting that the administration of lethal agents to terminally ill patients be classed as “aid in dying” rather than assisted suicide. The doctors’ lawyers reportedly drew the distinction as follows:

"Suicide is a choice of whether to die or not. Aid in dying involves not whether a person will die, but when, and how much pain and suffering the patient must endure first."

The judge, Julia Aurigemma, rejected the request, arguing that the cases in question are precisely the sort of case to which the assisted suicide prohibition was intended to apply. But the question remains whether there is a meaningful distinction between assisted suicide and aid in dying, and if so, whether it is morally significant.

The distinction, as formulated by the lawyers, does seem clearly bogus. No-one yet faces choices about whether to die. All actions that might plausibly be classed as suicide are really decisions about the timing of death. But there does seem to be a genuine distinction lurking here somewhere.

Read More »Whether to die, or when to die? The distinction between assisted suicide and ‘aid in dying’

Oxford Debates — Performance-Enhancing Drugs Should be Allowed in Sport — Moderator’s Opening Statement

Oxford Online Debates

by Roger Crisp

Taking drugs to improve one’s sporting performance seems, on the face of it, a paradigmatic example of a wrong action. It combines two activities usually considered shameful: the use of banned substances, and cheating.

But on closer inspection the issue is more complicated. The use of some drugs, such as nicotine or caffeine (both of which might enhance performance in some cases), carries little or no stigma, and the charge of cheating would be inappropriate were the drugs in question explicitly permitted.

Read More »Oxford Debates — Performance-Enhancing Drugs Should be Allowed in Sport — Moderator’s Opening Statement

Oxford Debates – Performance enhancing drugs should be allowed in sport – Opposer’s opening statement

Oxford Online Debates

by John William Devine

In just over two years the world’s elite athletes will descend on the U.K. for London 2012. Should these athletes be permitted to use performance enhancing drugs or should the fight to eliminate such drugs from sport continue? The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) maintains that the use of performance enhancing drugs (doping) is contrary to the ‘spirit of sport.' While WADA’s account of the spirit of sport is frustratingly underdeveloped, the idea that the purpose of sport provides reason to prohibit doping captures something important.

Read More »Oxford Debates – Performance enhancing drugs should be allowed in sport – Opposer’s opening statement