Tag: domestic violence

Bioethics Blogs

In the Journals – June 2017, part one by Aaron Seaman

Anthropology and Aging (open access)

The Social Context of Collective Physical Training among Chinese Elderly: An Anthropological Case Study in a Park in Beijing

Yeori Park

This study analyzes the social context in China where the elderly participate in collective physical training, a cultural activity specific to the country. For this study, senior citizens aged 60 or above who participated in collective physical training in a park in Beijing were observed for five months. Research results found that collective physical training enables formation of social networks providing mutual caring and support. On the other hand, the participants conform to the self-disciplined modern discourse to survive in the post-Mao society. They do collective physical training due to their social conditions, such as the poorly established welfare system for the aged, severance pay that is too low to cover medical expenses. Although the participants seem to autonomously choose collective physical training based on their own preferences, the context of Chinese society, including hidden government intentions, leads the elderly to participate in training activities.

Social Contract on Elderly Caregiving in Contemporary Chile

Carola Salazar

This paper explores the definitions of social contract on elderly caregiving among a group of seven Chilean aging experts. The data show that for Chileans, family remains a strong institution that should provide care of its members, with daughters or daughters-in-law being the preferred person to provide care. Also, age segregation, along with the gradual privatization of services such as health care and the pension system, promotes individuality: this can become a problem for future generations because they are no longer concerned with helping others.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

World Elder Abuse Awareness Day (#WEADD)

Kathy Greenlee,
Vice President for Aging and Health Policy

Why I Am Tired and Inspired

Kathy Greenlee is the Vice President for Aging and Health Policy at the Center for Practical Bioethics. She previously served as the U.S. Assistant Secretary for Aging and Administrator of the Administration for Community Living from 2009 to 2016. She will be the keynote speaker at “A Conference on Elder Rights and Protection” in Maui, Hawaii on June 15, 2017, World Elder Abuse Awareness Day.

The United Nations recognizes June 15 as World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Started in 2006 by Elizabeth Podnieks of the International Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse, the day has become an international opportunity to highlight the global problem of the abuse of older people.

During my tenure as U.S. Assistant Secretary for Aging, I had the honor of observing “World Day” in venues as exotic as the White House and the United Nations Headquarters in New York City. The problem of abuse of the aged is ubiquitous. It happens in every corner of the world, in every culture. Unfortunately and outrageously, it happens to one out of every 10 older adults in the United States.

The impact of abuse can be immediate, such as a sudden punch or a sexual assault. It can develop over time, as is the case with older adults who are neglected and allowed to languish, decline and die from the horrible circumstances that accompany the failure to receive care. Elder abuse can be caused by family members who strike out because of stress, anger or greed.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Dangerous Love and Anti-Love Drugs: Neuroethics & Public Health Problems

By Kelsey Drewry
Kelsey Drewry is a student in the Master of Arts in Bioethics program at the Emory University Center for Ethics where she works as a graduate assistant for the Healthcare Ethics Consortium. Her current research focuses on computational linguistic analysis of health narrative data, and the use of illness narrative for informing clinical practice of supportive care for patients with neurodegenerative disorders.
The half-priced heart-shaped boxes of chocolates lining grocery store shelves serve as an undeniable marker of the recent holiday. Replete with conceptions of idyllic romance, Valentine’s Day provides an opportunity to celebrate partnership, commitment, and love. However, for those experiencing heartbreak or unrequited love, Cupid may be a harbinger of suffering rather than giddy affection.

The transition from love to pain is an incredibly common experience, and one that is formative for many. The extent of character building in heartbreak and other negative affection experiences is bounded, though, by certain types of “dangerous love”. According to Brian Earp and colleagues, this classification might include domestic abuse, pedophilia, or even jealousy-induced homicide (Earp et al 2013). The suffering associated with these cases surpasses any beneficial emotional development, leading instead to potential enduring physical and psychological harms. Instances of “dangerous love” might become the targets for “drugs that manipulate brain systems at whim to enhance or diminish our love for one another” (Young 2009, 148), which seem to be a reasonable potential product of current trajectories of neuropharmocological research.
Image courtesy of Flikr

These “anti-love” drugs are certainly beneficently intended, and may indeed be of great value in some instances.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Is It Okay to Say that Research ‘Verges on Scientific Racism’? by Matthew Wolf-Meyer

Last fall, a group of researchers – mostly biological anthropologists and sleep researchers – published a study of three ‘pre-industrial’ communities, one in Latin America, two in Africa, and claimed that based on their data, consolidated nightly sleep is a human norm, inferring that it is the product of natural selection. The media picked up the research findings, and I read write ups of it in a number of outlets, which led me to the original article and sparked conversations with me and other sleep-interested scholars about the validity of the research. A couple of months later, I was asked by the editor of Sleep Health if I would like to respond to the findings of the article (which you can find here), in part because the researchers made an argument against a claim that I have made – corroborating Roger Ekirch – that human sleep has only recently consolidated, largely as a result of industrial capitalism in the 19th century. But I was primarily motivated by the anthropology-informed opportunity to point out that no contemporary society offers us a window to some pre-industrial past or earlier evolutionary moment. To suggest otherwise – and here I’m quoting myself – ‘verges on scientific racism.’

So what was the assumption that the researchers were working off of that would lead them to such a claim and why would I find it controversial? They took a form of social organization – namely hunter-gatherer foraging – as indicating that the people who practice that form of subsistence share qualities with a stage of human history when that social organization was predominant.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Letter from Iraq: Ethical Dilemmas in an Iraqi Burn Centre

Guest Post by Mustafa AL-Shamsi

Health requires a multidisciplinary approach.  In the absence of proper support, facilities and literate people, there is little that a physician can do to cure his patient regardless his proficiency.  The following is not a story; it comes from what I experienced when I was an intern at the burn unit.  I faced a lot of ethical rather than medical challenges.  Some I could cope with; others were not so easy.

I was an intern in Basra city, according to the internship curriculum.  My internship in the burn unit changed my outlook and made me aware of how fragile the health care system is in Iraq.  Being a doctor in the Iraqi health care system is tough; there are many challenges to stand against, but you have little to do because of a limited resources, poor training and supervision.  The most disturbing thing is you have little to do for your patient!  (Others have noted similar problems.)

I learned a lot of good-sounding terms like mercy and empathy during medical school, but is any of them is applicable in the burn unit?  There was too much sorrow and pain to deal with.  Human lives were placed on the shelf without care from authorities.  On my first few days I was upset by every burn patient; however, this made me feel sick and frustrated, and I began to project my emotion on my family, friends and patients.  I realised that I would not able to manage patients properly if I continued dealing with this situation from this position, so I developed a new strategy: apathy.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Joanna Kempner’s Not Tonight: Migraine and the Politics of Gender and Health by Christine Labuski

Not Tonight: Migraine and the Politics of Gender and Health

Joanna Kempner

University of Chicago Press, 2014, 232 pages

In her thoroughly engaging new book, Not Tonight: Migraine and the Politics of Gender and Health, Joanna Kempner argues that, despite a new clinical paradigm through which migraine has been transformed from a psychogenic to a neurobiological disorder, the condition remains “an opportunity to make jokes about moral character” (2). Grounding this assertion in the concept of a “legitimacy deficit,” (9) i.e., a gap between what sufferers experience and what biomedicine and broader society formally recognize as illness, Not Tonight demonstrates the synergistic roles that gender and perceptions of moral character can play in the lived experience of a disease condition, including its clinical management and representation. At its core, the book reveals how the virtual incompatibility between high moral character and a feminine gender impedes the social and clinical apprehension of migraine as a “real” disease condition.

Not Tonight is a fairly wide-ranging text. Across five chapters (each of which stand alone on their own merits), Kempner presents a set of interlocking variables through which the condition of migraine has thus far been understood: its social and clinical history; recent pharmaceutical advertising campaigns; online advocacy and activism; and the recent neurobiological turn in migraine care. In addition to online forums and blogs, much of Kempner’s fieldwork took place at clinical conferences where (mostly female) patients—as proxies for the specialty of headache medicine—were routinely maligned by clinicians, and where the neurobiological paradigm at the heart of her analysis has become institutionalized.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Sex/Gender: Part III: What Counts as Adequate Function? by Constance Cummings

A Critical Moment: Sex/Gender Research at the Intersections of Culture, Brain, and Behavior

FPR-UCLA 2016 Conference Summary

The sex/gender conference succeeded in bringing together people “with different ideas and skills, different ways of thinking, that are actually transforming the field,” observed Carol Worthman, chair of Part 3 (“What’s at Stake?”). The earlier sessions (see Parts 1 and 2) provided us with a better sense of the complexities of sex/gender; we also learned some ways to usefully deconstruct – and form new ideas about – old questions. But there’s a lot at stake, Worthman continued. In the following session, speakers addressed the theme (“What counts as adequate function?”) from a variety of perspectives and from individual to macro levels of analysis. The question regarding adequate function is critical, Worthman reminded the audience, “because a lot of what is lurking in the background is frequently this question of ‘not good enough’ or ‘not a real person,’ both exogenously, in terms of how people are viewed, and endogenously, in terms of how they view themselves” by internalizing cultural norms. This suggests the importance of recognizing culture-mind-brain “intra-actions” (Barad, 1998, p. 96, noting “the inseparability of ‘objects’ and ‘agencies of observation’”) that can perpetuate shame, fear, and other forms of suffering.

This post reviews two films shown at the conference (Bitter Honey and Tales of the Waria) and three talks by neuroscientist Melissa Hines and anthropologists Hillard Kaplan and Marcia Inhorn.

Bitter Honey

On Day 1 and 2 of the conference, FPR founder and president, Robert Lemelson, a documentary filmmaker and psychological anthropologist on the UCLA faculty, screened Bitter Honey.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Half-and-Half Wits May 6, 2016 Transgendered men and women have some of the highest rates of…

May 06, 2016

by Sean Philpott-Jones, Chair, Bioethics Program of Clarkson University & Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

I lost a friend last week. I didn’t lose her in the physical sense. She didn’t pass away or move to the other side of the globe. Rather, after a disturbing online exchange, I made the decision to, in the words of Gwyneth Paltrow, ‘consciously uncouple’ myself from her.

What happened was this: on her Facebook page she posted a popular Internet meme that read, “If Caitlyn Jenner went missing, would her picture appear on the back of a carton of half-and-half?” While some people might find a celebrity-mocking joke like this funny, I found it in exceedingly bad taste. 

I was also surprised that this joke was posted by someone who is herself a member of the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community. I asked her to take the post down, explaining my concerns about the type of message that a joke like that sends. She refused and our online conversation quickly went downhill. I finally ‘de-friended’ her.

Now anyone who knows me well should know that I rarely take offense at jokes. I enjoy sarcastic, self-depreciating and (often) inappropriate humor, particularly of the type that skewers celebrities and politicians, or that calls out some of the absurdities of modern life. My snarky comment about Gwyneth Paltrow is proof of that. So what was it about this joke that got me so riled up?

The problem with a joke like the one about Caitlyn Jenner is it perpetuates ugly stereotypes about the transgender community.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

The Transhumanist Candidate

Some years ago, in deepest Asia, an American was reportedly kidnapped and hypnotized into doing his captors’ bidding any time the Queen of Hearts was played. Oh, wait, that was the Manchurian Candidate (1, 2, 3). Let’s start again.

If you pay attention to the lamestream media, as a former VP candidate called our mighty organs, you may think that the pool of those running for President has or soon will have tightened from 23 (six D’s, don’t forget Lessig, and seventeen R’s) to two. You would be wrong.

In fact, it has shrunk from 1,711 to something like ten. According to Ballotpedia, four Democrats other than Hillary Clinton (or Bernie Sanders) will be on more than 5% of presidential ballots, along with two repeat offenders (Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Jill Stein) and possibly Jesse “The Body” Ventura. Add in He Trump, and that makes nine. But wait, there’s more!

Zoltan Istvan is running.

The Federal Election Commission, stick-in-the-muds that they are, insist on calling him Zoltan Istvan Gyurko. He calls himself an American-Hungarian but this Magyar site seems to say, according to Google Translate, that he is a Hungarian-born American. That could cause a bit of difficulty, though certain other candidates seem to have evaded or redefined the “native-born” requirement.

Also, the FEC lists his party affiliation as “Other.” But Zoltan is actually running on behalf of the Transhumanist Party. The two other officers are Zoltan’s wife Dr. Lisa Memmel (who is an ob-gyn) and a big fan currently writing a “guide book” to Istvan’s transhumanist philosophy.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics News

Crossing Borders for Fertility Services – Panel Discussion

New reproductive and genetic technologies are providing people with the opportunity almost allover the world to have  children. Variations in legislation across countries, however, are giving place to the phenomenon of cross-border reproductive  care, where people cross international borders to access a variety of reproductive services fertility treatment, egg procurement, and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. This raises a host of ethical concerns about whether women’s rights and needs are appropriately respected.
Speakers: DAISY DEOMAMPO, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Anthropology at Fordham University; LESLIE MORGAN STEINER, blogger, public speaker, and author of Baby Chase and Crazy Love, which was the subject of the first TED Talk by a domestic violence survivor; BRIAN ESSER, lawyer and practitioner, and panel moderator ANA LITA, Ph.D., Executive Director of Global Bioethics Initiative.
WHEN 
Wednesday | March 23, 2016
2:30 – 4:00 PM
WHERE
Hardin Room, 11th Floor
777 UN Plaza (at East 44th Street)
New York, NY 10017
ADMISSION
FREE  |  GBI Guests Only

The post Crossing Borders for Fertility Services – Panel Discussion appeared first on Global Bioethics Initiative (GBI).

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.