...... Professional Ethics Report Publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Scientific Freedom, Responsibility & Law Program in collaboration with the Committee on Scientific Freedom & Responsibility, Professional Society Ethics Group

VOLUME XIX NUMBER 2 Spring 2006 s ADVISING AND INFLUENCING legislative process? My own research successful at grasping unfamiliar SCIENCE POLICY IN THE UK AND investigates these questions by comparing scientific concepts (4). While increasing THE US the mechanisms of government particularly the number of qualified scientists in as they relate to areas of science policy elected government would undoubtedly By Richard Elliott upon which these two nations have failed assist the accurate communication of to agree (e.g. stem cell research, climate science, in theory, there is no reason Richard Elliott, a former intern with the change, and genetically modified agricul- why the advice of a third party (provided AAAS Scientific Freedom, Responsibility ture). it is accurate, impartial and reflects the and Law Program, recently completed a diversity of scientific opinion and Master’s degree in Science, Culture and The role of scientifically trained politi- acknowledges the often inconclusive Communication at the University of cians nature of research) cannot provide a Bath, UK. He holds a BSc in molecular The landslide Labour victory of 1997 substitute for scientific training among biology from the University of Edinburgh elected more Members of Parliament (MPs) legislators. and studied for a year on international with scientific qualifications than there had exchange at the University of California ever been before, but there are still only Governmental scientific advisory groups Santa Barbara. about 10% with a degree-level qualification Key bodies with science advisory in science, medicine or engineering (1). roles within the UK government include Science, engineering and technology Similarly, in the USA, it has been reported the Office of Science and Technology have a growing influence on almost every that less than five percent of Congress- (OST), directed by the Government’s aspect of modern public policymaking. men/women have such backgrounds (2). Chief Scientific Adviser, his Committee (a Each month, political debates on matters A lack of scientific expertise among cross-departmental forum for the ranging from healthcare and the environ- legislators may not matter for some discussion of science and technology- ment to education and national security, political decisions, but there are now so related issues), the Council for Science legislators (most without formal scientific many issues influenced by science and and Technology, and the Parliamentary training) encounter a multitude of highly technology that those unable to under- Select Committees on Science and technical concepts and make difficult stand basic scientific concepts are placed Technology. In addition, although they decisions regarding science policy. It may at a distinct disadvantage. These individu- have no formal advisory function, the be unrealistic to expect all of these als are potential prisoners to the advice of monthly debates of the Parliamentary decisions to be informed by a thorough scientifically-literate civil servants, expert and Scientific Committee provide a examination of the latest research. At the advisory committees, or lobbyists whose permanent liaison between Parliamentar- very least, legislators however, should interests may not be immediately apparent. ians and stakeholders representing have access to a system of scientific Such groups may, for example, be tied to industry, academia, scientific societies advice, enabling them to identify issues multinational corporations or biased and the general public, allowing the requiring scientific input and draw on an towards permitting questionable or airing of scientific and technological appropriate range of expert knowledge to hazardous actions with the intention of concerns. support their decisions. securing profit or employment (3). Unlike their British counterparts, the But just how is the life’s work of the But is a lack of scientifically trained Science Advisor to the President and the research scientist transformed into the politicians really significant for science Office of Science and Technology Policy latest white paper? Which advisory policymaking? Dr. Evan Harris, an MP, (OSTP) that he directs have no statutory bodies are providing decision-makers qualified medical doctor and member of the access to the Executive and their with the expert scientific knowledge that House of Commons Select Committee on influence has varied significantly among they need? And crucially, how are they Science and Technology, has stated his administrations, often depending on the adapting to meet growing demand admiration for MPs without formal Director’s personal relationship with the without compromising either scientific scientific training, who, he suggests, are President. Political analysts, scientists integrity or the conventions of the nonetheless highly capable and generally and even the former OSTP Director (5)

Spring 2006 Professional Ethics Report 1 ...... (Elliott continued from page 1) Naively perhaps, the OTA was swept National Academies of Science and aside with the suggestion that Members of Engineering and the Institute of Medi- have lamented the declining status of Congress should be able to get the cine), produces approximately 600 highly these institutions, which has become information they need by interacting detailed, peer-reviewed reports, work- particularly apparent under the Bush directly with scientific researchers. While shops and roundtable discussions per administration (6, p.29). Established in there are undoubtedly politicians on both year, often at the behest of Congress or 1972 and dismantled in 1995, the Office sides of the Atlantic who contact scien- other federal agencies (16). of Technology Assessment (OTA) tists directly, it is nevertheless overly Traditionally, lobby and advocacy provided Congress with its own institu- simplistic to think of scientific advisory groups have been an important part of the tional source of expert scientific and bodies as mere intermediaries between US political landscape, but much less technological advice. Analogous to the researchers and politicians. In fact, at their significant in the UK. The New Labour current UK Parliamentary Office of best, such organizations operate jointly as strategy of listening to as many diverse Science and Technology, the OTA did journalist, translator, and fact-checker all at interests as possible has led to a dramatic note policy recommendations, but once (9, p.39). Ostensibly a budget-cutting increase in the number of British advo- provided Congress with information and move, it has been suggested that the real cacy groups, but the extent of their objective analyses on a wide range of reason for the abolition of the OTA is political influence is debatable. In science and technology issues and their rooted in partisan division, chiefly the Washington DC, think tanks and advo- implications for government policy, as Republican perception of many scientific cacy groups provide Congress with a well as offering face-to-face briefings for bodies as institutions symbolic of liberal- great deal of technical expertise, often Members of Congress (7). ism (11). employing renowned scholars to analyze In place of the OTA, the Congres- Increased politicization of science science policy issues, produce reports, sional Research Service, the Government advice on Capitol Hill and in the White and testify on Capitol Hill. However, as Accountability Office, the Congressional House is also at the heart of mounting these groups tend to divide along party Budget Office, and other non-govern- criticism of the Bush administration’s political lines, policy debates (for example, ment bodies share responsibility for relationship with the scientific community. those on climate change and obesity) can providing scientific and technical advice Among other attacks, a petition and two become a sparring match between two to Congress. However, in recent years, reports, released in 2004 by the Union of sets of experts with competing views, and several authors have criticized this Concerned Scientists, accuse the adminis- lead one to question the reliability of the arrangement, suggesting that these tration of appointing under-qualified advice. The powerful corporate lobby that entities are ill-equipped to provide the individuals and non-scientists to senior has targeted the US Congress for many same dedicated service as the OTA and roles on the President’s scientific advisory years is now becoming more prevalent in calling for the establishment of a staff, of applying political ‘litmus tests’ to Europe and, considering recent reports of replacement body to fill the gap (6, 8, 9, applicants for advisory roles, and of scaremongering in the European Parlia- 10). dismissing highly qualified scientific ment by manufacturers, apparently has advisors for political reasons (12, 13, 14). similar problems with corruption (17, 18). Editor: Mark S. Frankel The White House has always denied such UK OST guidelines suggest that Deputy Editor: Azurii K. Collier accusations, saying that it makes deci- departments should draw on a sufficiently Contributing Authors: Eitan Bernstein, sions based on the best available science. wide range of advisers, both within and Meg Flanagan, Hayley Ivins, outside government, ensuring that their Enita A. Williams Non-governmental scientific advisory selection matches the nature of the issue The Professional Ethics Report is published groups and is sufficiently balanced to reflect the quarterly by the Scientific Freedom, Re- In addition to government bodies, diversity of opinion among experts (18, sponsibility and Law Program in collabora- scientific advice in the UK and the US is p.4-5). However, the sheer profusion of tion with the Committee on Scientific Free- also available from an extremely wide advisory bodies, many with overlapping dom and Responsibility and the Profes- variety of independent sources: from responsibilities, and almost all claiming to sional Society Ethics Group, American As- online ‘blogs’ and the inquiries of public- represent ‘sound science’, has created a sociation for the Advancement of Science, dialogue initiatives to studies sponsored disjointed and impenetrably complex 1200 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, by corporations and advocacy groups, advice system, and makes this task DC 20005, (202) 326-6606; Fax (202) 289- and the scholarly articles of NGOs and 4950; E-mail: [email protected]; WWW exceedingly confusing. Despite lessons http://www.aaas.org/spp/dspp/sfrl/sfrl.htm. learned societies. In the UK, the Royal learned from the BSE and foot-and-mouth Back issues of Professional Ethics Report Society and the Wellcome Trust are two crisis (20, Vol.1), there remains insuffi- are now on-line at http://www.aaas.org/spp/ key sources of reliable independent cient awareness and appreciation of dspp/sfrl/per/per.htm advice, while in the US, the National science within government departments Research Council (the operating arm of the (21). Despite the growing number of This newsletter may be reproduced Letters to the Editor: The editors welcome organizations competing to advise and without permission as long as comments from our readers. We reserve the influence government policy, in the US proper acknowledgement is given. right to edit and abridge letter as space per- there are no guidelines to govern their ISSN: 1045-8808 mits. Please address all correspondence to role in the policy process or their the deputy editor. (Elliott continued on page 3)

Spring 2006 Professional Ethics Report 2 ...... (Elliott continued from page 2) interaction with decision-makers (22). communicators continue to combat the 14. Union of Concerned Scientists, 2004 C. popular myths of science. Specifically, Scientific Integrity In Policy Making - Further Conclusions, recommendations and legislators must understand that the work Investigation of the Bush Administration’s further study. Misuse of Science [online]. Available from: and opinions of scientific experts are http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/ As a result of scientific and techno- neither infallible nor incorruptible, and are scientific_integrity/ logical progress, scientific advice has seldom in complete consensus, particu- Scientific_Integrity_in_Policy_Making_July_2004_1.pdf become indispensable to policymakers, larly when it comes to the sort of cutting 15. Office of Science and Technology Policy, 2004, Statement of the Honorable John H. offering scientists greater social and edge research that motives new legisla- Marburger, III On Scientific Integrity in the political influence at the price of increas- tion. Bush Administration [online], Available from: ing public distrust (23). There is no http://ostp.gov/html/ucs/ simple or definitive solution for providing References ResponsetoCongressonUCSDocumentApril2004.pdf 1. Local Science Profiles for the United scientific advice to legislators. The most 16. The National Academies website, 2005, Kingdom, Campaign for Science & Engineering, About – The National Research Council striking thing about the responses I 2002. [online]. Available from: http:// received from politicians and advisory 2. Kraus, C.K., and Suarez, T.A., 2004, Is There www.nationalacademies.org/nrc/ groups was the confusion and apparent a Doctor in the House? . . . Or the Senate?: 17. File On 4: Lobbying the EU, BBC Radio 4, Physicians in US Congress, 1960-2004, Journal lack of consensus on this issue. One Tuesday, 22 November, 2005 at 20:00 GMT of the American Medical Association, November and repeated on Sunday, 27 November at 17:00 British parliamentarian went so far as to 3, 2004; 292: 2125 - 2129. Available from: GMT, Reporter: Sarah Spiller, Producer: Jenny suggest that I shouldn’t “bank on two http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/ Chryss, Editor: David Ross MPs giving the same answer” (24). 292/17/2125 Available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ 3. Scott Cato, S. 2000. Political Alchemy. The Readily available sources of reliable, programmes/file_on_4/4459586.stm Ecologist, Vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 41-43. 18. Drew, E. 2005, Selling Washington, The New comprehensive and impartial scientific 4. The Scientific Alliance. 2003. Event York Review of Books, Volume 52, Number 11, advice are essential for science policy- Proceedings: Science Meets Politics [online], June 23, 2005. Available from: http:// making, but they must be accompanied Available from: www.nybooks.com/articles/18075 http://www.scientific-alliance.org/events_items/ by more extensive guidelines to direct 19. HM Government. October 2005. Guidelines past_events/sciencemeetspolitics.htm on Scientific Analysis in Policy Making [online], legislators in their use. 5. Brumfiel, G., 2004. US science policy: mission Available from: http://www.ost.gov.uk/policy/ Situated on the borderline between impossible. Nature 428 (6980): 250-251. advice/guidelines_2005.pdf officialdom and outside interests, the rise 6. Kelly, H., Oelrich, I., Aftergood, S. and 20. The BSE Inquiry: The Report, 2000. The Tannenbaum, B.H., 2005. Flying Blind: The and fall in the political fortunes of Inquiry into BSE and variant CJD in the United . Rise, Fall, and Possible Resurrection of Science Kingdom [online], Available from: http:// organizations like the British CST and the Policy Advice in the United States. Federation of www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/report/volume1/ American OSTP and OTA suggests that American Scientists Occasional Paper No. 2. chapter14.htm scientific advisory bodies in both Available from: http://www.fas.org/resource/ 21. Campaign for Science & Engineering in the 12022004142618.pdf countries are subject to the whim of the UK, 2005. Science Policies for the Next 7. The OTA Legacy [online], 1997. Available Parliament: Agenda 2005-2010. Available prevailing political administration (22, from: http://www.wws.princeton.edu/ota/ from: http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/ p.168). However, developing new sources 8. Holt, R., 2002, Bringing Science and documents/2005/CaSE0503files/ of independent scientific advice should Technology Back to Congress. New Jersey CaSE0503Ch3.pdf Congressman Rush Holt’s website [online]. 22. The National Academy of Sciences, 2005, be a particular priority in the US, where Available from: http://holt.house.gov/ Science and Technology in the National partisan divisions may already have display2.cfm?id=2976&type=Home Interest: Ensuring the Best Presidential and contributed to the elimination of the OTA 9. Keiper, A., 2004, The New Atlantis, Number 7, Federal Advisory Committee Science and and the Bush administration’s problem- Fall 2004/Winter 2005, pp.19-50. Available Technology Appointments, Washington DC: The from: http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/7/ atic relationship with science. National Academies Press. Available from: http:/ keiper.htm /books.nap.edu/html/national-interest/ My research and the abbreviated 10. Mooney, C., 2005, Requiem for an office, index.html discussion presented here have only Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists September/ 23.. Freedland, J., 1999. Goodbye to the oracle, managed to skim the surface of a topic of October 2005 pp.40-49 (vol. 61, no. 05). The Guardian, Wednesday 9 June 1999, Available from: http://www.thebulletin.org/ rapidly growing importance to both Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/ article.php?art_ofn=so05mooney Columnists/Column/0,5673,288268,00.html science and politics, and one in which 11. Mooney C., 2005, The Republican War on 24. Elliott, R., 2005. Advising and influencing Science, USA: Basic Books. there is immense scope for further study. science policy in the UK and the USA - 12. Union of Concerned Scientists, 2004 A. A case study on human embryonic stem cell Additional qualitative analyses, specifi- Statement: Restoring Scientific Integrity in research. Dissertation submitted for the MSc in cally candid interviews with policymakers Policymaking [online], Available from: http:// Science, Culture & Communication. The and their advisers across the framework www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/ University of Bath. of government, would pave the way for scientists-signon-statement.html improved dialogue between scientists, 13. Union of Concerned Scientists, 2004 B. Scientific Integrity politicians and peripheral stakeholders in Policymaking – An Investigation into the that will be essential in developing new Bush Administration’s Misuse of Science mechanisms for providing scientific [online]. Available from: http://www.ucsusa.org/ advice to government. assets/documents/scientific_integrity/ In politics, as with the media and the RSI_final_fullreport_1.pdf public, it is important that science

Spring 2006 Professional Ethics Report 3 ......

IN THE NEWS “Drive to cut fraudulent research,” BBC News, rapid development of nanotech research, 12 April 2006 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/ the field, encouraging researchers and NEWLY CREATED UK RESEARCH 1/hi/health/4903184.stm) ethicists to consider the implications at INTEGRITY OFFICE WILL “Panel to promote good conduct in medical this relatively early stage. Liu focused on DEVELOP CODES OF CONDUCT, research,” Universities UK press release, 12 new developments in nanotechnology, SUPPORT WHISTLEBLOWERS April 2006 (http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/ noting that the progress in basic labora- mediareleases/riolaunch.asp) tory research is far exceeding the actual The United Kingdom’s new Re- “UK takes action on medical research fraud,” Pharmaceutical Business Review Online, 13 application of the technologies. This may search Integrity Office (ROI) has been April 2006 (http://www.pharmaceutical- signal a need to partly shift attention to created to assist research institutions in business-review.com/ the implementation of developed handling allegations of research miscon- article_news.asp?guid=3CF28925-0EEE-44EB- technologies. duct. Its primary mandate is to establish 9493-7C411D806134) The ethics papers, comprised of best practice guidelines applicable Personal communication, Dr. Andrew contributions from Drs. Donald Evans, across institutions throughout the UK. Stainthorpe, May 2006 Bert Gordijn, and Joachim Schummer, Uniform national policies are needed *MF gave a broad overview of the current because, according to Professor Michael understanding of ethical considerations Rees, Chair of the British Medical UNESCO WORKING GROUP in the field. Gordijn’s paper addressed the Association’s Medical Academic Staff TACKLES NANOTECHNOLOGY & new applications of nanomedicine and Committee and head of the three-year ETHICS recommended a focus on a specific sub- pilot program that culminated in creation discipline of research within of the ROI, “at present there is no central The Nanotechnology & Ethics Expert nanotechnology in order to explore fully source for sharing best practice, Group, an international working group of the ethical issues. Schummer distin- resulting in a patchy approach across fourteen ethicists and scientists, met twice guished between the types of definitions the UK. We hope this initiative will tackle in Paris last year to discuss the status of of nanotechnology, preferring to use a this gap.” nanotechnology in preparation for a “real definition” (a list of research areas Charged with promoting research UNESCO Policy Document. The UNESCO that fall under the broad heading of integrity nationwide, ROI will serve Policy Document, composed of several nanotechnology) when discussing universities and industry, as well as the papers outlined below, is expected to be ethical issues. He also identified two government’s National Health Service. finalized by the spring 2007 meeting of the types of ethical issues: 1) those resulting Individual research institutions will World Commission of the Ethics of directly from research and development, remain responsible for investigations of Scientific Knowledge and Technology. such as environmental effects of new alleged misconduct, as the ROI has no After its completion, it will serve as an materials and intellectual property rights, formal mandate to do so. Rather, the official advisory document for the Director and 2) those resulting from the more office will enable institutions to General of UNESCO. general application of nanotechnology in proactively set ethical research stan- The July 5-6, 2005 meeting introduced society, such as governance, equity and dards. In addition to establishing best draft papers for group consideration in education. Evans explored the develop- practice guidelines, ROI will maintain a three areas surrounding nanotechnology in ment of medical technologies and their register of expert advisors, conduct society: science, ethics, and policy. The ethical impact on society, particularly training programs and seminars, and December 6-7, 2005 meeting, and the focus within genetics and reproductive host a dedicated website of this report, finalized the papers with assistance. He predicts nanotechnology (www.UKRIO.org.uk). input from the entire expert group. Three will face similar ethical issues and asks In addition, the UK Research identifiable themes throughout the the question, “Are there important Integrity Office will serve as a supportive meetings were: 1) recognition of the lack of distinctions between making people resource for whistleblowers, who are a precise definition of nanotechnology and better and making better people?” often instrumental in uncovering nanomedicine 2) cautiousness about Drs. Abdallah Daar, Michele Jean, fraudulent research practices. The office developing policy in light of this, and 3) and Kyunghee Choi addressed the policy will be equipped to receive anonymous difficulty in addressing ethical issues amid component of nanotechnology. Daar’s reports of fraud or misconduct, and intense public hype and disagreement paper looked at the connections between capable of marshalling individuals whose among experts nanotechnologies and worldwide expertise may provide guidance. Within the science section, the group development, emphasizing the need for According to ROI director Dr. examined papers submitted by Drs. Jun developing countries to embrace science Andrew Stainthorpe, a majority of the Fundano, Margareth Andrade, and Jixing and technology to best utilize their UK’s health and biomedical research Liu. Fundano explained the need for resources. Jean noted the need for better organizations support the office and its analysis of ethical issues that arise with public understanding and knowledge to mandate. each new advance in nanotechnology and improve the quality of the debate on stressed the importance of further defini- nanotechnology ethics. Choi focused on tion of the field. Andrade illustrated the ( News continued on page 5)

Spring 2006 Professional Ethics Report 4 ...... (News continued from page 4) Synthetic Biology,” which was made GREETING THE ELEPHANT IN the educational aspect of available online for public comment from THE ROOM nanotechnology, particularly encouraging May 29- June 7, 2006. The final version, the involvement of NGOs, governments, incorporating public comments and The Center for American Progress and third parties in the effort to educate suggestions, will be published soon. held a day long seminar this April entitled the public. For further information: “Bioethics and Politics: Past, Present, and http://portal.unesco.org/shs/admin/ The Declaration stressed key provisions Future,” where bioethics scholars ev.php?URL _ID=8958&URL_DO=DO_ in the public draft: acknowledged both the increasingly TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201 political nature of bioethics and the *HWI 1) “First, we support the organization of formidable presence of conservatives, an open working group that will under- religious groups, and republican leader- SYNTHETIC BIOLOGISTS ADDRESS take the coordinated development of ship in directing bioethics dialogue. The IMPACT OF FIELD IN PUBLIC improved software tools that can be used program consisted of three components, DECLARATION to check DNA synthesis orders for DNA the first of which was a panel discussion sequences encoding hazardous biological on how bioethics has played an increas- In the warm California sun, the systems; we expect that such software ing role in political dialogue and public budding field of synthetic biology tools will be made freely available.” policy. Next, Patricia King, a law professor attempted to regulate itself in light of and bioethics veteran, shared some her ever-expanding research capabilities. The 2) “Second, we support the adoption of experiences and ideas about the intersec- Synthetic Biology 2.0 Conference on May best-practice sequence checking technol- tion of bioethics and politics. Finally, 20-22, hosted by the University of ogy, including customer and order scholars and professionals discussed the California at Berkeley, saw researchers validation, by all commercial DNA current scene in bioethics and hypoth- acknowledge the societal and ethical synthesis companies; we encourage esized the trajectory of bioethics and impact of DNA synthesis and sequence- individuals and organizations to avoid politics. This report will focus on the first checking technology. There are no patronizing companies that do not panel. specific government regulations for the systematically check their DNA synthesis “The Emergence of Politicized field, prompting many synthetic biolo- orders.” Bioethics” panel included Dan Callahan gists to aim toward initial self-governance (The Hasting Center), John Evans to guide its development. 3) “Third, we support ongoing and future (UCSD), Ruth Faden (Johns Hopkins The field of synthetic biology discussions within international science University), and Eric Meslin (Indiana analyzes complex natural systems and and engineering research communities for University). Dan Callahan spoke to replicates those systems artificially, the purpose of developing creative audience members about the early days of usually with the use of genetic material. solutions and frameworks that directly bioethics: from the early sixties, when it Synthetic biologists utilize these new address challenges arising from the was “fashionable to be wary of technol- systems for biomedical treatments, ongoing advances in biological technol- ogy” because of its association with the renewable energy sources, and other ogy, in particular, challenges to biological Vietnam War and weapons development, human or environmental needs. Yet the security and biological justice.” to the 80s and 90s, when the cultural trend prospect of engineering “natural” was to embrace and legitimate technology. biological processes, particularly when 4) “Fourth, we support ongoing and Initially there were two tracks of bioethical dealing with genetics, has proved future discussions with all stakeholders thought – the “Ethics of Ends,” i.e., what controversial. Early on, synthetic biology for the purpose of developing and does society want from biology, and the has encountered opposition, even in its analyzing inclusive governance options, “Ethics of Means,” i.e., how should most recent quest for self-governance. In including self-governance, that can be society regulate biology and protect an open letter addressed to the partici- considered by policymakers and others autonomy. pants of the SB2.0 conference, groups such that the development and applica- The Ethics of Ends track eventually such as Genewatch UK and the Interna- tion of biological technology remains disappeared in favor of the Ethics of tional Center for Bioethics, Culture and overwhelmingly constructive.” Means, as the audience for bioethics Disability criticized the unrestrained rapid At press time, the final version of the shifted from the public to the political elite growth of the field, urging researchers to Declaration was not yet available. For for whom regulation was priority. In the refrain from self-regulation and instead further information: 90’s, reaction from conservatives against “join with society to demand broad public http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/32982 the apparent capture of bioethics by pro- oversight and governmental action to technology liberals sparked culture wars. ensure social wellbeing.” However, SB2.0 http://syntheticbiology.org/ Callahan took a moment to criticize both participants came to a consensus that http://www.etcgroup.org/article.asp?newsid=562 sides of the debate for their “tendency to self-governance is the correct first step leave decisions to market choices,” which *HWI and adopted the “Declaration of the he argues is the “worst possible idea” for Second International Meeting on addressing controversial bioethics issues. (News continued on page 6)

Spring 2006 Professional Ethics Report 5 ......

(News continued from page 5) a 24-hour news cycle thanks to the talk to each other when one side is based Next, Ruth Faden presented her own internet, television, and radio. There is an on secular philosophies and the other on hypotheses about why and how bioeth- increased awareness of advisory bodies religious doctrine? The consensus ics has become politicized. Faden and how they impact dialogues interna- seemed to be that while these conversa- assumes that the politicized bioethics is a tionally. In addition, the fact that more tions are frustrating for both sides, they recent phenomenon and that “politi- government dollars are pouring into are critical to the role of bioethics in the cized” refers to something more than science makes regulation all the more public dialogue. “commentators lining up on different salient to politicians and the public. The second panel, and focus of the sides on bioethics issues.” Faden’s Evans offered a sociological look at rest of this report, featured scholars and premise is that politicized bioethics refers how various religious and cultural professional discussing current bioethics to the recent trend of bioethics “being ideology shifts have shaped current and hypothesizing the trajectory of used to serve the political agenda of a bioethics. Evans insisted that bioethicists bioethics and politics. Kathyrn Hinsch particular ideology.” She hypothesizes and others should be glad that more view used competitive analysis to address two reasons for this. The first is that the points are being including in bioethics concerns that liberal bioethics is losing very nature of current bioethics issues discussion. Since many religious views, groundIN to THEconservatives SOCIETIES in the public and entails a deep left/right divide. Current especially expressly conservative ones, political sphere. Hinsch, Founding issues like abortion, embryonic stem cell have been marginalized in bioethics Director of the Women’s Bioethics research, etc., demonstrate this polariza- dialogues in the past, the fact they are Project, presented findings suggesting tion, while past issues lack this facet, now included, even dominating the only conservatives and religious groups instead being overwhelmingly one-sided debate, is a clear sign the debate is more have devoted substantial financial, and (e.g., human subjects research). The inclusive. He argued that the key to the political resources to affecting bioethics second is that “the maturing and current alignment of bioethics was the policy. Conservatives have done this in a expanding of American conservatism on timing. Evans noted that George W. Bush, number of ways including: “dividing social issues” has caused this corre- an evangelical conservative, came to progressives, polishing [conservative’s] sponding politicization of bioethics. power in the midst of all these polarized image as a protectors, and galvanizing Despite the current political battles being issues. Religious conservatives were still grassroots against women’s reproductive waged in bioethics, Faden believes there excluded from scholarly debate of rights.” She used the example of Ameri- is some cause for optimism because there bioethics, so they turned to these cans United for Life to elucidate her are still a number of non-politicized commissions and advisory boards to argument. This formerly single issue pro- bioethics issues to be addressed. force a dialogue. The demographics of the life group has added the broader issue of Eric Meslin offered a very different political elites shifted towards numbers bioethics to its agenda. This group now view of the issue. Meslin pointed out the that favored similar conservatives. Evans ranks states as the Top Ten Most intrinsically political nature of govern- further argued that the tables are turning, “Dangerous” and the Top Ten Most ment advisory committees and groups and conservatives are now trying to “Safe” States based on women’s repro- that deal in bioethics. First, the creation exclude progressives as they were once ductive safety in abortion clinics as a of the advisory body itself is a political excluded. He concluded that progressives opposed to pure availability of proce- act, in that it is constituted by political need to cut their losses before they are dures[1]. One mechanism used to “rally” leaders and in the public sphere. Second, completely excluded from the bioethics conservative troops has been framing the it is expected that the advisory body will debate, and before bioethics is rendered conflict as a true battle of good versus have a political impact, from the name of completely fraudulent. In the public arena, evil. In one case, the Pope publicly the group, to membership selection, to the progressives should avoid trying to condemned geneticists in a major new the issues it will address. Meslin added convert public opinion, but simply paper. Hinsch points out that the funding that even the public content of letters educate and let the public choose sides. for these organizations is hard to track and reports bare the imprint of political The question and answer session because consortiums and think-tanks affect, referring to how the editing following the panel discussion raised funding these efforts are also obscuring process advances specific political some particularly troubling issues for the source of the funds. The breadth of agendas. Finally, the “political currency” many bioethicists attending. Questions the conservative effort includes not only allotted to advisory committees, such as included ‘What role should bioethicts diversity in agenda and funding, but a the Presidential seals, authority and have in politics: independent and potentially global target audience as well. expertise, is yet another way in which objective vs. advocate and subjective?’ Organizations like The Federalist Society bioethics advisors are political actors. ‘If bioethics itself has become political, are heavily trying to influence United The nature of bioethics advisory can bioethicists remain impartial?’ Nations and international policy. committees is just half of the story; the Panelists seemed to have no answer to James Fossett, Associate Professor current environment also lends itself to these questions, responding that it very of Public Policy and Public Health at the politicization. Present day advisory much depends on the context. Communi- University of Albany, State University of committees work in the public sphere on cation was another problem mentioned in New York, suggested that liberal bioethics the question portion. How do both sides take the fight to a new battle ground – the states. (News continued on page 7) Spring 2006 Professional Ethics Report 6 ...... (News continued from page 6) ronmentalists are able to reframe environ- Society (SACGHS) was tasked with mental issues so that “environmental examining the problems that might arise in Progressive bioethics has typically issues are health issues, local and conducting a massive population study in focused on national affect but could make international security issues, economic the United States. In a preliminary report significant headway if it looked more issues, and social justice issues.” She released this past May, the committee towards state law. Typically dismissed suggested that progressive bioethics identifies key concerns regarding such a because of the dismal outcome in slavery should stick to the traditional academic project and suggests multiple methods by and racial issues in the past, Fossett dialogue and seek to engage other like- which to address them, voicing its claims states no longer deserve the “bad minded groups, not merely react to enthusiasm at the prospect of the wrap.” State level efforts offer two major conservatives. She also cautioned that project’s undertaking. benefits, according to Fossett: “as IN THE SOCIETIES bioethicists engaging in private sector The hypothetical project, which separate entities…[they are] good sites consulting with biotechnology companies would gather data and biological samples for dealing with non-consensus and must do their best to “retain the ethics of from hundreds of thousands of human public preferences,” and they have a bioethics,” not just support private party subjects, raises scientific, public, and “powerful” impact on both levels of interests to the detriment of others. ethical concerns due to the sheer government because they serve as Glenn McGee, Founding Director of magnitude of the assignment. Acknowl- “laboratories of democracy.” Fossett went the Alden March Bioethics Institute, edging these concerns, the SACGHS on to profile policy at the state level as a beganIN his THEpresentation SOCIETIES by claiming that, report emphasizes the need to keep the means to “geographically deal with “Bioethics is low-tech…We [bioethicists] public informed of the project’s purpose pluralism,” “provide multiple forums” (i.e., are Luddites.” McGee suggests bioethics, and procedures, citing the importance of ‘progressives have used states in past in particular, progressive bioethics, maintaining public trust and gathering when administration has been conserva- develop internet resources like blogging. public feedback. Additionally, the report tive and non-responsive’), and “have Blogging is an online messaging system identifies five areas of potential issues: relatively stable policy.” Fossett sug- in which users can post responses to research policy, research logistics, gested liberal bioethicists appeal to state- various prompts, articles, and news in regulatory/ethical considerations, public level economics and re-election goals. realtime. Conservative bioethicists have health implications, and social implica- Governors seeking re-election know that again beaten liberal bioethicists to the tions. the strength of the state economy makes punch with a number a well established Among the committee’s primary a huge difference at the ballot box, and blogs like: Second Hand Smoke, The research policy concerns are potential “this may leave some conservative Human Future, and The Thing Is. The disputes over intellectual property rights looking red states looking more pink” as speed and breadth of access possible and the depletion of available funding for they try to encourage biotech and pharma through this medium allows for a rich and other projects. From a logistical angle, the companies to build in their states (e.g., timely dialogue among bioethics without report spots possible complications in the Missouri and Texas). Prestige is another the delayIN ofTHE the peer-review SOCIETIES publication project’s ability to collect environmental powerful incentive to state politicians, IN THE SOCIETIES process. But along with the benefits, information and to capture the diversity and luring more top scientists to universi- there is the corresponding challenge in of an entire population. Ethical concerns ties and more big name companies could the lack of credentialed peer-review. include the typical yet magnified prob- be a great feather in a savvy politician’s McGee holds that despite this concern, lems of informed consent and privacy, hat. Fossett pointed out that, since the medium will play an increasingly while public health worries highlight the progressives are losing the policy and important role for both sides of the gap between risk identification and the public relations game against conserva- bioethics debate. Several renowned delivery of appropriate treatment. tives/republicans, if they want to turn the journals, like Nature, are reportedly In response to these concerns, the tide, they may have to simply “take what working on blogs linked to the magazine. SACGHS report recommends a host of they can get” and work at the individual McGee then went on to describe his preventative measures. Suggestions state level to foster change. current project, the Bioethics Forum, include the creation of a multi-disciplinary Virginia Ashby Asharpe, Visiting which, though similar in format to a blog, project leadership, the establishment of Scholar in Ethics and Environmental Jus- works more like an online journal with clear and consistent definitions of sub- tice, Georgetown University, discussed careful monitoring and review by accred- populations, and the formation of an how environmental issues used to be apart ited experts in the field. independent committee of experts in of the inaugural “cannon of bioethics” but *EAW science, law, and ethics charged with were shut out because of the difficulty in examining the project’s social ramifica- assigning blame to specific actors, a fea- HHS COMMMITTEE CONSIDERS tions. The report adds that all project ture common to other “bioethics” topics. GIANT POPULATION STUDY, findings ought to be released upon their Sharpe argued that we need to get the envi- EXPRESSES ENTHUSIAM FOR emergence, along with descriptions of ronment back on the bioethics agenda, in POTENTIAL PROJECT possible clinical uses. part because better research tools help paint In addition to these recommenda- a clearer picture of what is happening to In 2004, the HHS Secretary’s Advi- tions, the committee proposes the the environment. Another reason is envi- sory Committee on Genetics, Health, and (News continued on page 8) Spring 2006 Professional Ethics Report 7 (NEWS continued from page 7) . place July 13-14, 2006 in Albany, New York. fee for the courses. Classes include creation of a working group tasked with The evolving role of political influence in “Theory and Skills of Ethics Teaching,” determining the most ethical procedures bioethics, political bias in bioethics, and “Ethics of Contemporary Controversies,” for the project. The committee specifies the future of bioethics in a democratic “Foundations for Ethical Business that any such group ought to contain society will be discussed. ASBH is seeking Practice,” and “Environmental Aesthet- members of relevant HHS agencies, the papers for interactive conference sessions. ics.” Registration information and FDA, and the Office for Human Research A 250-word abstract describing the original complete course descriptions are available Protections, among others. work should be submitted. Topics of at http://www.umt.edu/ethics. According to the SACGHS, a popula- interest include: the difference between tion study involving hundreds of academic and political advocacy, the thousands of participants could prove an possibilities for dialog across political lines, Washington University in St. Louis is invaluable resource to droves of future and the emerging role of religious and sponsoring a conference on “Mentoring scientific projects. The wealth of data and politically-affiliated bioethics centers. and Supervision for the Responsible tissues gathered in such an undertaking Additional conference information is Conduct of Research.” The conference would allow researchers to comprehen- available at http://politics.bioethics.net. will be held July 24-25, 2006, at the Eric P. sively study the locations of individuals’ Newman Education Center, WU School of genetic variants, the distinctions in the Medicine campus. Principal investigators variants of healthy and sick individuals, The Ethics Education Program sponsored will acquire the knowledge to evaluate and the interactions between genetic by UNESCO disseminates information on their own mentorship and supervision of variants and the environment. Eventually, the recently adopted Universal Declaration postdoctoral fellows and staff. Coordina- a large population study could lead to of Bioethics and Human Rights. The tors, postdocs, grad students and staff significant strides in our understanding of program maps existing teaching programs will learn how to talk to their PIs and the relationship between genes, the in the area of ethics in the UNESCO identify research practices that create risk environment, and diseases. Recognizing member states. The programs are de- for a breach of responsible research this, the SACGHS expresses a keen scribed and made available in the Global practice. Session topics include: Partici- interest in the realization of the project, Ethics Observatory (GEO) pant Eligibility, Enrollment and Consent, concluding that despite multiple chal- (www.unesco.org/shs/ethics/geobs). To Maximizing Compliance and Minimizing lenges, the benefits of a large population promote quality ethics education, UNESCO Adverse Events, Best Practices in Data study would be significant. developed an Ethics Teacher Training Management, and Responsible Author- http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/sacghs/ Course. The first course will occur October ship. Scholarships are available to reports/LPS%20Public 30-November 3, 2006 in Bucharest, Roma- graduate students. To register, or for more %20Comment%20Draft%20Report.pdf nia. A similar course will be scheduled for information, visit http://epi.wustl.edu/ Public comments welcome until July 31, 2007 in another region. Registration msrcr.htm 2006. information is available at http:// *ENB portal.unesco.org/shs/en/ev.php- URL_ID=9448&URL_DO=DO_ The Council of Graduate Schools (CGS) is ANNOUNCEMENTS TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html. soliciting proposals from CGS member institutions for teaching graduate students the responsible conduct of The American Society for Bioethics and The University of Montana is offering research. These projects will be funded the Humanities (ASBH) is sponsoring a short courses in ethics during summer by a grant to CGS from NSF, and must conference on “Bioethics and Politics: 2006. The courses are open to students, target students in physical sciences and The Future of Bioethics in a Divided interested professionals, and the general engineering. CGS will award $15,000 to Democracy.” The conference will take public. There is no out-of-state tuition eight institutions. The goals of this project are: to continue to develop a core of graduate dean leadership for respon- Support From the Following Societies sible conduct of research (RCR) and is Gratefully Acknowledged: generate information about what works in RCR training across disciplinary bound- American Anthropological Association aries. Activities supported by the award American Political Science Association may include, but are not limited to, American Psychological Association development of new, interdisciplinary RCR courses; sponsorship of RCR events Association for Psychological Science for faculty; assessment and evaluation of American Society for Engineering Education student learning about RCR issues; and American Sociological Association collection and management of data. Applications must be received by August 11, 2006. For more information, contact Paul Tate, [email protected]

Spring 2006 Professional Ethics Report 8