The scope of the recent bioethics debate in Germany: Kant, crisis, and no confidence in society

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 273-281

  Krones, Tanja ^a  

^a PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADVISORY COMMITTEE; BEGINNING OF HUMAN LIFE; BIOETHICS; CULTURAL FACTOR; EMBRYO RESEARCH; ETHICS; GERMANY; HUMAN; MIGRATION; PUBLIC OPINION; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; SOCIAL STATUS;

ADVISORY COMMITTEES; BEGINNING OF HUMAN LIFE; BIOETHICAL ISSUES; BIOETHICS; CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS; EMBRYO RESEARCH; EMIGRATION AND IMMIGRATION; ETHICS, RESEARCH; GERMANY; HUMANS; PUBLIC OPINION; SOCIAL CONDITIONS; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT;

EID: 33745551476     PISSN: 09631801     EISSN: 14692147     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0963180106060348     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Bundesärztekammer (BÄK). Diskussionsentwurf zu einer Richtlinie zur Präimplantationsdiagnostik. Deutsches Ärzteblatt 2000;97(9):A-525-8.
2. See Schiermeier Q. German Parliament backs stem cell research. Nature 2002;7(415):566;
3. see also Heinemann T, Honnefelder L. Principles of ethical decision making regarding embryonic stem cell research. Bioethics 2002;16:530-3.
4. Projects on "Context sensitive bioethics in reproductive biomedicine" conducted by the Working group of Bioethics-Clinical Ethics and the Center for Conflict Studies at the University of Marburg, in cooperation with the Universities of Giessen, Heidelberg, Berlin, and Leipzig, funded by the Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). See Krones T, Richter G. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD): European perspectives and the German situation. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2004;29(5):623-40;
5. see also Krones T, Schlüter E, Manolopoulos K, Bock K, Tinneberg HR, Koch MC, et al. Public, expert and patients' opinions on preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in Germany. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 2005;10(1):116-23.
6. Habermas J. Die Zukunft der menschlichen Natur. Auf dem Weg zu einer liberalen Eugenik? Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; 2001.
7. See Biller-Andorno N. Gerechtigkeit und Fürsorge. Zur Möglichkeit einer integrativen Medizinethik. Frankfurt a.M./New York: Campus; 2001;
8. see also Braun K. Menschenwürde und Biomedizin. Zum Philosophischen Diskurs der Bioethik. Frankfurt a.M./New York: Campus; 2000;
9. Haker, H. Ethik der genetischen Frühdiagnostik. Sozialethische Reflexionen zur Verantwortung am Beginn des menschlichen Lebens. Paderborn: Mentis; 2002.
10. Merkel R. Rechte für Embryonen? Die Menschenwürde lässt sich nicht allein auf die biologische Zugehörigkeit zur Menschheit gründen. In: Geyer C., ed. Biopolitik: Die Positionen. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp; 2001:51-65.
11. See Sperling S. From crisis to potentiality: Managing potential selves: stem cells, immigrants and German identity. Science and Public Policy 2004;31(2):139-49.
12. For the English translation of the Embryo Protection Act, see International Digest of Health Legislation 1992;43:740-5.
13. In fact, the EPA does not contain explicit statements on the moral status of the embryo. Yet, according to the EPA, every totipotent cell after the syngamy of the two genomes is considered as an embryo and most of the interpreters see the EPA in the line of the ruling of the German supreme court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) in regard to abortion in 1975. In this judgment on abortion, prenatal life from the moment of implantation into the uterus was regarded as having a right to life. Accordingly, abortion was still defined as a criminal act, "illegal but not punished," but every woman can abort after undergoing counseling in the first 3 months of pregnancy or can abort until the baby is carried to term, if the birth of the child was considered by the woman and her physicians to be an unbearable burden for her. The underlying reason for the implementation of the EPA was to protect the human embryo effectively in the process of in vitro fertilization (IVF), because in the definition of the 1975 judgment, the pre-implantation embryo was not explicitly considered. For an overview of the German debate on the status of the embryo and PGD, see Krones T, Richter G. Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD): European perspectives and the German situation. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2004;29(5):623-40;
14. see also Schreiber HL. The legal situation regarding assisted reproduction in Germany. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 2003;6(1):8-12.
15. See Kathrin Braun's view on the bioethics debate and alliances built in the debate, also referred to in the last paragraph of this article.
16. See Hans Jonas' The Imperative of Responsibility (1984), first published in German: Jonas H. Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Frankfurt: Insel Verlag; 1979.
17. See note 9.
18. See Final Report of the Enquete-Kommission Recht und Ethik der modernen Medizin. Drucksache 14/9020, Deutscher Bundestag; 2002. Nationaler Ethikrat, Stellungnahme Genetische Diagnostik vor und während der Schwangerschaft; 2003. Available at: www.ethikrat.org/stellungnahmen/stellungnahmen.html.
19. See note 7, Sperling 2004.
20. See note 8 discussion.
21. See note 8 discussion.
22. Braun K. Not just for experts. The public debate about reprogenetics in Germany. Hastings Center Report 2005;35(3):42-9.
23. See her book Menschenwürde und Biomedizin, quoted in note 5, which is considered as a central scientific basis of the German antibioethics movement.
24. See note 3, Krones et al. 2005.
25. See Lindemann Nelson N. Moral teachings from unexpected quarters. Lessons from the social sciences and managed care. Hastings Center Report 2000;30:12-7;
26. see also Haimes, E. What can the social sciences contribute to the study of ethics? Theoretical, empirical and substantive considerations. Bioethics 2002;16(2):89-113;
27. Hedgecoe, A. Critical bioethics: Beyond the social science critique of applied ethics. Bioethics 2004;8(2):120-43;
28. Borry P, Schotsmans P, Dierckx K. The birth of the empirical turn in bioethics. Bioethics 2005;19(1):49-71.