Examen Bio-ethics II - Summary
Lesson 1 - Introduction to ethics
Why ethics?
Crucial for identifying ethical issues and discussing them + acquiring elements to develop ma
moral decision. Ethics courses can help clarify terminology, structure issues by separating moral
and non-moral aspects and apply theories and principles to propose solutions. Bioethical issues
are interdisciplinary involving medical, philosophical, legal, scienti c, sociological and religious
aspects.
Ethics (=moral philosophy) is a branch of philosophy that involves systematising, defending and
recommending concept of right and wrong behavior. It involves the critical evaluation of
assumptions and arguments. Ethics seeks to determine criteria for judging whether an action is
right or wrong and to evaluate the motives and consequences of these actions. The process of
ethical reasoning is more important than the conclusion; there are no wrong answers.
There is discussion about the relationship between law and ethics:
Nature law: suggests an inherent link between law and morality, with the idea that laws without a
moral basis are not legitimate.
Legal positivism: argues that the legitimacy of a law is independent of its morality, meaning a law
can be unjust but still valid.
De ning nomenclature: using precise language is important in ethical discussions.
Ex. De ning older people requires sensitivity to heterogeneity within the age group
Ethics theories:
• Kantianism:
Based on the concept of moral duties and rules, not consequences (deontology).
Immanuel Kant: individuals pose moral obligations on themselves as rational beings.
The categorical imperative is a test to see if desires can be universally granted.
The rst formulation of the categorial imperative is that you should “act only on that maximum
through which you can at the same time will become a universal law”.
Eg. Your maxine is stealing & lying —> can’t work universally
The second formulation is that people should never be treated “simple as a means but always at
the same time as an end”, since all people are equal as rational beings.
Pros: simple structure; nit only the consequences but also motives are included in reasoning; free
choice between di erent options.
Cons: are people completely free in their choices and rational?; abstract rules that don’t seem
immediately applicable in concrete cases; what is 2 duties contradict each other?
• Utilitarianism: = consequentialism
Focuses on the greater good for the greatest number of people; the goal, outcome or
consequence is most important.
Teleological ethics aims for a higher goal, such as maximum happiness or social bene t.
It aligns with the general feeling of right and the pursuit of maximum well-being, but is di cult to
reconcile with justice, human rights or past actions.
Counter arguments: can be too strict, demand too much from people, lower living standards to
the level of the needy and in ates personal relationships.
Act utilitarianism - Jeremy Bentham: laws are all good if they maximise pleasure and minimise
pain for the majority. One only takes the consequences as criteria for morally correct actions.
—> received much criticism because it entailed unacceptable implications.
Rule utilitarianism - John Stuart Mill: achieve the greatest happiness for the largest group through
pre-formulated rules that actions must comply with. The key point remains the principle of the
greatest happiness, but limits the consequence criterion.
1 of 10
fi fi fi ff fl fi fi ffi
, Quality-adjusted life year (QALY): used in cost-utility analysis to measure the e ectiveness of a
treatment in healthcare; origin found in utilitarianism; stands for an extra year of life in good health
—> improve a person’s quality of life for the total remaining life.
Disability-adjusted life years (DALY): measure the total burden caused by illnesses.
Weaknesses pf QALYs: people don’t estimate illnesses the same, lifespan and age may be
prioritised and the needs of less privileged groups may not be fully accounted for.
• Virtue theory:
Focusses on the character and motivation of a person, rather than on consequences or moral
rules. It interprets facts in a speci c context and thinks by analogy. Striving for golden mean.
Virtues (courage, honesty, compassion, …) are considered essential for achieving a good and
ourishing life (Aristotle’s eudaimonia).
Pros: more personal, supports doing well, friendship, honesty, love, adaptive, non-line-bound.
Cons: non-universal nature of ‘virtues’.
Ethics principles:
Principlism - Tom Beauchamp & James Childress: idea of 4 principles:
• Bene cence: the obligation to do good
• Non-male cence: the duty to do no harm; considered a trade-o between levels of harm in
healthcare.
• Autonomy: respect for the decisions of people who can make their own decisions.
• Justice: all people are equal so all people have the same moral value; requires equal
opportunities and a fair distribution of healthcare.
Proportionality: principle that balances individual freedom against broader social welfare.
Lesson 2 - Integrity
Scienti c integrity in research refers to the principles and practices that ensure research is carried
out properly —> protecting science from scientists.
3 violations of scienti c integrity - FFP:
• Fabrication: making up research results and presenting them as if they are real.
• Falsi cation: changing or manipulation results to get a di erent outcome.
• Plagiarism: presenting the work of others as one’s own.
+ unacceptable research practices such as con icts of interest; holding up others’ work; wrongly
accusing others of misconduct; exaggerating one’s achievements and their importance.
Questionable research practice (QRP):
• Manipulating authorship or denigrating the role of other researchers in publications.
• Re-publishing substantive parts of one’s own earlier publications, including translations,
without duly acknowledging citations
• Citing selectively to enhance own ndings or to please editors, reviewers or colleagues
• Withholding research results
• Allowing funders/sponsors to jeopardise independence in the research process or reporting of
results so as to introduce or promulgate bias
• Expanding unnecessarily the bibliography of a study
• Accusing a researcher of misconduct to other violations in a malicious way
• Misrepresenting research achievements
• Exaggerating the importance and practical applicability of ndings
• Inappropriately hampering the work of other researchers
• Misusing seniority to encourage violations of research integrity
Good research practices > questionable research practices > FFP
—> when there is intent, you move more to the red area.
In Belgium handling of research misconduct is self-regulating system by the research institutes.
Procedural rules at VUB in case of research misconduct: mediation > hearings of all parties and
evidence > if research misconduct is con rmed, a sanction to academic board.
2 of 10
fl
fifi fi fi fi fifi fi fl ff fi ff ff
Lesson 1 - Introduction to ethics
Why ethics?
Crucial for identifying ethical issues and discussing them + acquiring elements to develop ma
moral decision. Ethics courses can help clarify terminology, structure issues by separating moral
and non-moral aspects and apply theories and principles to propose solutions. Bioethical issues
are interdisciplinary involving medical, philosophical, legal, scienti c, sociological and religious
aspects.
Ethics (=moral philosophy) is a branch of philosophy that involves systematising, defending and
recommending concept of right and wrong behavior. It involves the critical evaluation of
assumptions and arguments. Ethics seeks to determine criteria for judging whether an action is
right or wrong and to evaluate the motives and consequences of these actions. The process of
ethical reasoning is more important than the conclusion; there are no wrong answers.
There is discussion about the relationship between law and ethics:
Nature law: suggests an inherent link between law and morality, with the idea that laws without a
moral basis are not legitimate.
Legal positivism: argues that the legitimacy of a law is independent of its morality, meaning a law
can be unjust but still valid.
De ning nomenclature: using precise language is important in ethical discussions.
Ex. De ning older people requires sensitivity to heterogeneity within the age group
Ethics theories:
• Kantianism:
Based on the concept of moral duties and rules, not consequences (deontology).
Immanuel Kant: individuals pose moral obligations on themselves as rational beings.
The categorical imperative is a test to see if desires can be universally granted.
The rst formulation of the categorial imperative is that you should “act only on that maximum
through which you can at the same time will become a universal law”.
Eg. Your maxine is stealing & lying —> can’t work universally
The second formulation is that people should never be treated “simple as a means but always at
the same time as an end”, since all people are equal as rational beings.
Pros: simple structure; nit only the consequences but also motives are included in reasoning; free
choice between di erent options.
Cons: are people completely free in their choices and rational?; abstract rules that don’t seem
immediately applicable in concrete cases; what is 2 duties contradict each other?
• Utilitarianism: = consequentialism
Focuses on the greater good for the greatest number of people; the goal, outcome or
consequence is most important.
Teleological ethics aims for a higher goal, such as maximum happiness or social bene t.
It aligns with the general feeling of right and the pursuit of maximum well-being, but is di cult to
reconcile with justice, human rights or past actions.
Counter arguments: can be too strict, demand too much from people, lower living standards to
the level of the needy and in ates personal relationships.
Act utilitarianism - Jeremy Bentham: laws are all good if they maximise pleasure and minimise
pain for the majority. One only takes the consequences as criteria for morally correct actions.
—> received much criticism because it entailed unacceptable implications.
Rule utilitarianism - John Stuart Mill: achieve the greatest happiness for the largest group through
pre-formulated rules that actions must comply with. The key point remains the principle of the
greatest happiness, but limits the consequence criterion.
1 of 10
fi fi fi ff fl fi fi ffi
, Quality-adjusted life year (QALY): used in cost-utility analysis to measure the e ectiveness of a
treatment in healthcare; origin found in utilitarianism; stands for an extra year of life in good health
—> improve a person’s quality of life for the total remaining life.
Disability-adjusted life years (DALY): measure the total burden caused by illnesses.
Weaknesses pf QALYs: people don’t estimate illnesses the same, lifespan and age may be
prioritised and the needs of less privileged groups may not be fully accounted for.
• Virtue theory:
Focusses on the character and motivation of a person, rather than on consequences or moral
rules. It interprets facts in a speci c context and thinks by analogy. Striving for golden mean.
Virtues (courage, honesty, compassion, …) are considered essential for achieving a good and
ourishing life (Aristotle’s eudaimonia).
Pros: more personal, supports doing well, friendship, honesty, love, adaptive, non-line-bound.
Cons: non-universal nature of ‘virtues’.
Ethics principles:
Principlism - Tom Beauchamp & James Childress: idea of 4 principles:
• Bene cence: the obligation to do good
• Non-male cence: the duty to do no harm; considered a trade-o between levels of harm in
healthcare.
• Autonomy: respect for the decisions of people who can make their own decisions.
• Justice: all people are equal so all people have the same moral value; requires equal
opportunities and a fair distribution of healthcare.
Proportionality: principle that balances individual freedom against broader social welfare.
Lesson 2 - Integrity
Scienti c integrity in research refers to the principles and practices that ensure research is carried
out properly —> protecting science from scientists.
3 violations of scienti c integrity - FFP:
• Fabrication: making up research results and presenting them as if they are real.
• Falsi cation: changing or manipulation results to get a di erent outcome.
• Plagiarism: presenting the work of others as one’s own.
+ unacceptable research practices such as con icts of interest; holding up others’ work; wrongly
accusing others of misconduct; exaggerating one’s achievements and their importance.
Questionable research practice (QRP):
• Manipulating authorship or denigrating the role of other researchers in publications.
• Re-publishing substantive parts of one’s own earlier publications, including translations,
without duly acknowledging citations
• Citing selectively to enhance own ndings or to please editors, reviewers or colleagues
• Withholding research results
• Allowing funders/sponsors to jeopardise independence in the research process or reporting of
results so as to introduce or promulgate bias
• Expanding unnecessarily the bibliography of a study
• Accusing a researcher of misconduct to other violations in a malicious way
• Misrepresenting research achievements
• Exaggerating the importance and practical applicability of ndings
• Inappropriately hampering the work of other researchers
• Misusing seniority to encourage violations of research integrity
Good research practices > questionable research practices > FFP
—> when there is intent, you move more to the red area.
In Belgium handling of research misconduct is self-regulating system by the research institutes.
Procedural rules at VUB in case of research misconduct: mediation > hearings of all parties and
evidence > if research misconduct is con rmed, a sanction to academic board.
2 of 10
fl
fifi fi fi fi fifi fi fl ff fi ff ff
