DOCSLIB.ORG

International Directory of | Bioethics * Organizations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
International Directory of | Bioethics * Organizations INTERNATIONAL DIRECTORY OF BIOETHICS ORGANIZATIONS Edited by Anita L. Nolen Mary Carrington Coutts INTERNATIONAL DIRECTORY OF | BIOETHICS * ORGANIZATIONS Edited by Anita L. Nolen Mary Carrington Coutts National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC 20057-1065 International Directory of Bioethics Organizations edited by Anita L. Nolen and Mary Carrington Coutts. Bioethics Resource Series, volume 1. Washington, DC: Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, 1993. Copyright © July 1993 by the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University. All rights reserved. This book may not be duplicated in any way without the expressed written consent of the publisher, except in the form of brief excerpts or quotations for the purposes of review. The information contained may not be duplicated in other books, databases or any other medium without written consent of the publisher. Making copies of this book, or any portion for any purpose other than your own, is a violation of United States copyright laws. This publication is supported by funds provided under Grant Number LM04492 from the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. Published by: National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature Kennedy Institute of Ethics Georgetown University Washington, DC 20057-1065 Toll free (U.S. and Canada): 800-MED-ETHX Telephone 202-687-3885 Fax: 202-687-6770 E-Mail: [email protected] ISBN 1-883913-11-X Table of Contents Table of Contents ........................... iii Introduction .......................... vii Advisory Board ....... .......viii Acknowledgements.............................................. ix About the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature.... xi Staff...................................................... xii Bioethics Organizations (alphabetical order by country, andlor state, and name of organization). Argentina.............................. 1 Australia............... 3 Belgium................. 21 Brazil .............. ..27 Canada................ ..29 Chile................................................................................... 45 China............................ 47 Colombia...................... ...49 Costa Rica ............... 51 Croatia...................... 53 Czech Republic...................................... 55 Denmark..................................................................... 57 England.............................................................................. 59 France.... ............. 73 Germany............................................................................85 Greece............................................................................... 91 Hungary ............................... 93 India............................ 95 Indonesia....................... 97 Israel.................................................................................. 99 iii Table of Contents International Directory of Bioethics Organizations Italy ......... ..........101 Japan ........ 109 Luxembourg.................. .......113 Malta............. 115 Netherlands................................ 117 New Zealand ......... 127 Norway...................... .....129 Philippines..................................... ...133 Portugal ........ ..135 Romania. ..... 137 Russia ...................................................... 139 Scotland ........................... 141 South Africa................... 143 Spain............................................... ...145 Sweden....................................... 147 Switzerland ........................... 153 Thailand .............. 157 Turkey ....................... 159 United States of America............................................ ...161 Arizona ........................... ...161 Arkansas ................... .163 California ............... 165 Colorado.................... 193 Connecticut ..... 195 District of Columbia ........................................ 197 Florida .......................... 207 Georgia ......... 211 Illinois.............. ...213 Indiana............................ 225 Iowa... .......................................................... 227 Kansas.....................................................................229 Maine ........................... 231 Maryland ....................................... 233 Massachusetts........................ 239 Michigan.................................... ....251 Minnesota......................... 255 Missouri....................................................................259 Nebraska........................................... 263 Nevada...................... 265 iv International Directory of Bioethics Organizations Table of Contents New Hampshire ........... ..267 New Jersey.. ..... ....269 New Mexico ....... 273 New York..............................................................275 North Carolina... ..... ................285 North Dakota............ 287 Ohio.............. 289 Oklahoma.................. .................................297 Oregon.............. ........299 Pennsylvania ........... 301 Rhode Island ...... ........307 South Carolina......................................... .......... ...309 South Dakota.. ........... ...............311 Tennessee ..... 313 Texas... ...... ........317 Utah ....... 323 Vermont............................ ....325 Virginia ..... 327 Washington ............................................. .331 West Virginia ..... ...............337 Wisconsin.............................................. ...............339 Uruguay................... 345 Wales ......... 347 SPECIAL INDEXES Bioethics Organizations Granting Academic Degrees ......... .351 Bioethics Organizations Providing Consulting Services 353 Bioethics Organizations with International Focus.................... ..357 GENERAL INDEX ....... 359 INTRODUCTION International Directory of Bioethics Organizations Introduction introduction This Directory is an outgrowth of the many inquiries received in the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature (NRC) about bioethics activities worldwide. Organizations that could be identified as engaged in the study, teaching, research or practice of bioethics or health care ethics have been included. Some groups are large, university based research and education organizations with many employees. Others are less elaborate, staffed by part-time employees. Though every attempt has been made to include all bioethics organizations, some may have been omitted. All omissions are deeply regretted, and the editors encourage readers to advise us of organizations to be listed in future editions of this Directory. The criteria for inclusion in the Directory are: 1) The organization has to be involved in the broader field of bioethics, and not only in a subfield, such as euthanasia, human experimentation, genetics, etc. 2) The organization has to have some kind of permanent mailing address or office (ad hoc groups or free standing committees are not included); 3) Usually, individual hospital ethics committees were not included. However, some ethics departments or ethics offices in hospitals are listed because it appears that their activities reach beyond ethics consultation for a specific hospital. Standards have been relaxed somewhat for bioethics organizations in countries where bioethics is a new field. If it was not possible to verify that a full-fledged organization with permanent office and staff existed, the organization was nevertheless included it if it was the only bioethics group known to be in that region. The NRC maintains a database of information of the organizations listed here, and other ethics organizations. In cases where information available to us was insufficient to allow listing an organization in this Directory, we store what data we have in our in-house database for future use. The NRC will respond to inquiries about other organizations and will make every effort to list them in subsequent editions of this Directory. We hope this Directory is helpful. Your comments and suggestions for future editions are welcome. Vi! Advisory Board International Directory of Bioethics Organizations Advisory Board Ms. Rachel Goldstein Anderson Dr. Gretchen S. Kolsrud Director, Arizona Health Sciences Library Senior Associate College of Medicine Industry, Technology and Employment University of Arizona Office of Technology Assessment U.S. Congress Dr. Daniel Callahan Director, The Hastings Center Briarcliff Manor, NY Dr. Franklin M. Loew Dean Dr. Ronald Carson School of Veterinary Medicine Director, Institute for the Medical Humanities Tufts University University of Texas Medical Branch Galveston, Texas Mr. Richard Lyders Executive Director Dr. Ellen Fahey Texas Medical Center Library Professor, School of Nursing Houston, Texas University of Minnesota Dr. John C. Fletcher Prof. John A. Robertson Center for Biomedical Ethics School of Law School of Medicine University of Texas University of Virginia Dr. David J. Roy Hon. Gilbert Gude Director Former Director Centre for Bioethics Congressional Research Service Clinical Research Institute of Montreal Library of Congress Dr. Albert R. Jonsen Dr. Mark Siegler Chairman Director Department of Medical History and Ethics Center for Clinical Medical Ethics School of Medicine Pritzker School of Medicine University of Washington University of Chicago viii International Directory of Bioethics Organizations Acknowledgments Acknowledgments The editors would like to thank a number of individuals
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 4 the Catholic Scholastics
    Chapter 4 The Catholic Scholastics N HIS autobiography, B. A. Santamaria recalled his schooldays at Melbourne’s St Kevin’s College. IThe type of Catholic “apologetics” which was the strength of religious teaching at St Kevin’s prepared my mind for John Henry Newman and later C.S. Lewis, who both provided confirmation of my religious beliefs. To the professional philosopher, Newman and C.S. Lewis might appear to be no more than popularizers of other men’s ideas. Yet I do not despise the popularizer, since it seems that there are few new objections to religious belief. What one normally encounters are new formulations of the old objections—except, of course, for those contemporary philosophic systems which, in complete self-contradiction, pretend to prove the uselessness of reason as a mechanism in the search for truth … In the last analysis, the “apologetics” we absorbed could not lift religion above dependence on an act of faith, but an act of faith sustained by, and consonant with, reason. It was not an act of faith standing, as it were, unsupported or contrary to reason ... Sheehan’s Apologetics and Christian Doctrine provided me, as a schoolboy at matriculation standard, with the rational justification for my act of faith in Catholic Christianity. When I examine what so many Catholic students at the same level are offered today, I stand appalled not merely at the intellectual poverty of the offering but at the ease with which so many so-called teachers of religion dismiss the intellect as a convincing support for religious belief in favour of highly subjective “religious experience”.
    [Show full text]
  • 1974 Feb. Geoff Forster “The Human Predicament and the Mystery Of
    1974 Feb. Geoff Forster “The Human Predicament and the Mystery of Time” Mar. David Miller “Our Purposes?” Apr. Paula Hammet “Psychoanalysis and Existential Analysis” May Harry Redner “Nietzsche and Nihilism” June Colin Goodwin “Liberalism and Existentialism: J S Mill and J P Sartre” July John Collard “Camus’ Notion of the Absurd” Aug. Jack Mitchell “A Philosophy for Life” Sep. Niall Brennan “My Personal Philosophy” Oct. Robert Young “The Ethical Dilemma of Euthanasia” Nov. Stanley Gold “What is Psychotherapy?” Dec. Colin Goodwin “The Concept of a Person: Aquinas versus Sartre” 1975 Feb. Andrew Giles-Peters “The Problem of a Marxist Science” Mar. No lecture Apr. Paula Hammet “Gestalt Psychology” May John Dunham “The Individual as Seen by Hindu Culture” June Max Charlesworth “Existentialism and Marxism” July John Collard “The Absurd as Perceived in Ralph Emerson’s ‘The Invisible Man’.” Aug. Jurgen Klement “Aleister Crowley: Black Magician” Sep. Moshe Kroy “The Philosophy of Ayn Rand” Oct. Geoff Forster “Tolstoy and Existentialism” Nov. Karl Reus-Smit “Pluralism and the Multivalent Man” Dec. Brian Earl “Gurdjieff and the Inner World of Man” 1976 Feb. Claire French “Rilke: Poet of Struggle and Joy” Mar. Paula Hammet “Alcoholism and Existential Analysis” Apr. Helene Brophy “Simone de Beauvoir and the Feminist Writers” May Ronald Conway “The Cause and Motives of the Women’s Movement” June Morris Revelman “Sex and Politics” July John Collard “Post-War American Existentialism” Aug. Moshe Kroy “A Critical Examination of Karl Popper’s Philosophy” Sep. Norman Rose “Intimacy” Oct. Maxwell Newton “How I Tried to Survive” Nov. John Burstin “Is Krishnamurti an Existentialist? Dec.
    [Show full text]
  • Milestones in Jewish Medical Ethics: Medical
    Milestones in Jewish Medical Ethics Medical-Halachic Literature in Israel, 1948-1998 Mordechai Halperin, M.D. Main Chapters A. Definition of Concepts E. Third Decade 1. Introduction 1. The Dr. Falk Schlesinger Institute for 2. Medical Ethics Medical-Halachic Research 3. Jewish Medical Ethics 2. Assia 4. Medicine and Jewish Law 3. Moriah 5. Medicine and Halalcha 4. Mahanayim 6. Medicine & Judaism 5. Pathology and the Talmud 6. Lev Avraham B. Medical Halachic Literature: 7. Other Publications Ancient Times 1. From the Biblical Period through F. Fourth Decade the Eighteenth Century 1. Nishmat Avraham 2. From the Early Nineteenth Century 2. The Medical-Halachic Encyclopedia until the Establishment of the (Hebrew Edition) State of Israel 3. The Foundations of the Law Act - 3. Fifty Years of Statehood 1980 4. Judge Amnon Carmi and The Society C. First Decade for Medicine and Law in Israel 1. The Chief Rabbis: Rabbi Isaac 5. Technological Halachic Institutes Hertzog and Rabbi Ben-Tsiyyon 6. Additional Publications Meir Hai Uziel 7. The Jacobovits Center 2. Ha-Torah ve-Ha-Mdinah for Jewish Medical Ethics 3. Tsits Eli‘ezer 8. Special Lectures for Physicians 4. No‘am: Platform for Clarification of Halachic Problems G. Fifth Decade 5. Other Authorities 1. International Conferences in America and Israel D. Second Decade 2. Jewish Medical Ethics (JME) 1. First Bestseller: Shemirat Shabbat 3. Multimedia Halacha and Medicine ke-Hilchata 4. Precedents in Medicine and Law 2. Jewish Medical Ethics 5. Yael Shefer vs. The State of Israel 3. Tora She-be‘al Peh and Ha-Ma‘ayan 6. The Value of The State of Israel and The Patient Rights Act 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Max Charlesworth Oration 2016
    2876 THE VICTORIAN FOUNDATION FOR SURVIVORS OF TORTURE FOUNDATION HOUSE, MELBOURNE MAX CHARLESWORTH ORATION 2016 TACKLING HARD ETHICAL ISSUES - MAX CHARLESWORTH, BIOETHICS, REFUGEES AND SEXUALITY The Hon. Michael Kirby AC CMG THE VICTORIAN FOUNDATION FOR SURVIVORS OF TORTURE FOUNDATION HOUSE, MELBOURNE MAX CHARLESWORTH ORATION 2016 TACKLING HARD ETHICAL ISSUES - MAX CHARLESWORTH, BIOETHICS, REFUGEES AND SEXUALITY* The Hon. Michael Kirby AC CMG** MAX CHARLESWORTH REMEMBERED Max Charlesworth was one of the foundation professors of Deakin University. His discipline was not law but his expertise often took him into dialogue with lawyers, including me. I shared with him the distinction of being a Patron of Foundation House. It is a precious fact that his widow, Stephanie, and many of his children and grandchildren have attended to witness this tribute to his ongoing contributions to Australian society. I propose to recount his life’s journey. I will then seek to show the relevance of his approach to contentious controversies in the case of the three ethical questions: those concerning bioethical controversies; the treatment of refugee applicants and the issue of same-sex marriage. My * Max Charlesworth Oration 2016, delivered at the Melbourne Town Hall, 13 October 2016. ** Justice of the High Court of Australia (1996-2009); Australian Human Rights Medal 1990; Gruber Justice Prize 2011; Patron of the Victorian Foundation for Survivors of Torture. 1 thesis is that this approach to the resolution of such controversies has relevance for us today. The way we tackle difficult questions is of great importance for finding solutions that will more easily be accepted. Max Charlesworth was born in country Victoria.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Medical Ethics and End-Of-Life Care
    JOURNAL OF PALLIATIVE MEDICINE Volume 7, Number 4, 2004 Review Article © Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Jewish Medical Ethics and End-of-Life Care BARRY M. KINZBRUNNER, M.D. ABSTRACT While Judaism espouses the infinite value of human life, Judaism recognizes that all life is finite and, as such, its teachings are compatible with the principles of palliative medicine and end-of-life care as they are currently practiced. Jewish medical ethics as derived from Jewish law, has definitions for the four cardinal values of secular medical ethics: autonomy, benef- icence, nonmaleficence, and justice, with the major difference between Jewish law and sec- ular medical ethics being that orthodox or traditional Jews are perceived to limit their au- tonomy by choosing, with the assistance and advice of their rabbis, to follow God’s law as defined by the Bible and post-Biblical sources. With an understanding of Jewish medical ethics as defined by Jewish law, various issues pertaining to the care of Jewish patients who are near the end-of-life can be better understood. Jewish tradition contains within its textual sources the concept of terminal illness. The shortening of life through suicide, assisted sui- cide, or euthanasia is categorically forbidden. For patients who are terminally ill, treatments that are not potentially curative may be refused, especially when harm may result. Under cer- tain circumstances, treatments may be withheld, but active treatment already started may not usually be withdrawn. While patients should generally not be lied to regarding their condi- tions, withholding information or even providing false information may be appropriate when it is felt that the truth will cause significant harm.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to the Issues Surrounding Informed Consent and Halacha-R’Lila Kagedan
    An Introduction to the Issues Surrounding Informed Consent and Halacha-R’Lila Kagedan Salient Questions: Does Jewish law require informed consent? Is Halacha concerned with autonomy? How does Jewish law define capacity or incapacity? Who are the advocates for the incapacitated patient? What is bioethics/medical ethics? Medical ethics is a system of moral principles that apply values and judgments to the practice of medicine. Ethics is a philosophical discipline pertaining to notions of good and bad, right and wrong—our moral life in community. Bioethics is the application of ethics to the field of medicine and healthcare. Ethicists and bioethicists ask relevant questions more than provide sure and certain answers. Bioethics is multidisciplinary. It blends philosophy, theology, history, and law with medicine, nursing, health policy, and the medical humanities. Insights from various disciplines are brought to bear on the complex interaction of human life, science, and technology. Centre for Practical Bioethics What are the principles of bioethics? Four commonly accepted principles of health care ethics, excerpted from Beauchamp and Childress (2008), include the: 1. Principle of respect for autonomy, -Any notion of moral decision-making assumes that rational agents are involved in making informed and voluntary decisions. 2. Principle of nonmaleficence,- The principle of nonmaleficence requires of us that we not intentionally create a harm or injury to the patient, either through acts of commission or omission. 3. Principle of beneficence-The ordinary meaning of this principle is that health care providers have a duty to be of a benefit to the patient, as well as to take positive steps to prevent and to remove harm from the patient.
    [Show full text]
  • The Melbourne Spectrum
    Chapter 7 The Melbourne Spectrum T IS an old saying that philosophy begins with a sense of wonder. That is a source of philosophy, but there is another one, the sense Ithat ‘that’s all bullshit (and I can explain why)’. Different philoso- phers draw on these sources in differing proportions. An uncritical sense of wonder leads one out of philosophy altogether, into the land of the fairies, to start angels from under stones, find morals at every turn and hug the rainforest. A philosopher near the other extreme — or one, like David Stove, actually occupying the extreme — will at least still be doing philosophy, but it will consist entirely of criticism of others. In the Australian intellectual tradition, the wonder/criticism mix varies not only according to individuals but according to cities. At least, it has since 1927, when John Anderson arrived in Australia and Sydney and Melbourne set off on different paths. Various writers, mainly from Melbourne, have discoursed at some length on the con- trasts between the two cities in their styles of thought, and with all due allowance made for the hot air factor, there is undoubtedly some distinct difference to be identified. Where Sydney intellectuals, fol- lowing Anderson, tend to be critical, pessimistic, classical and opposed to ‘meliorist’ schemes to improve society, Melbourne’s unctuous bien pensants are eager to ‘serve society’, meaning, to instruct the great and powerful how they ought to go about achieving Progress and the perfection of mankind.1 Manning Clark — and it is characteristic of 1 J. Docker, Australian Cultural Elites: Intellectual Traditions in Sydney and Melbourne (Sydney, 1974); V.
    [Show full text]
  • Religion As a Virtue: Thomas Aquinas on Worship Through Justice, Law
    RELIGION AS A VIRTUE: THOMAS AQUINAS ON WORSHIP THROUGH JUSTICE, LAW, AND CHARITY Submitted by Robert Jared Staudt A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctorate in Theology Director: Dr. Matthew Levering Ave Maria University 2008 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE: THE CLASSICAL AND PATRISTIC TRADITION CHAPTER TWO: THE MEDIEVAL CONTEXT CHAPTER THREE: WORSHIP IN THE WORKS OF ST. THOMAS AQUINAS CHAPTER FOUR: JUSTICE AS ORDER TO GOD CHAPTER FIVE: GOD’S ASSISTANCE THROUGH LAW CHAPTER SIX: TRUE WORSHIP IN CHRIST CONCLUSION BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS 2 INTRODUCTION Aquinas refers to religion as virtue. What is the significance of such a claim? Georges Cottier indicates that “to speak today of religion as a virtue does not come across immediately as the common sense of the term.”1 He makes a contrast between a sociological or psychological evaluation of religion, which treats it as “a religious sentiment,” and one which strives for truth.2 The context for the second evaluation entails both an anthropological and Theistic context as the two meet within the realm of the moral life. Ultimately, the study of religion as virtue within the moral life must be theological since it seeks to under “the true end of humanity” and “its historic condition, marked by original sin and the gift of grace.”3 Aquinas places religion within the context of a moral relation to God, as a response to God’s initiative through Creation and 4 Redemption. 1 Georges Cardinal Cottier. “La vertu de religion.” Revue Thomiste (jan-juin 2006): 335. 2 Joseph Bobik also distinguished between different approaches to the study of religion, particularly theological, philosophical, and scientific, all of which would give different answers to the question “what is religion?.” Veritas Divina: Aquinas on Divine Truth: Some Philosophy of Religion.
    [Show full text]
  • Assisted Reproduction in Jewish Law Daniel B
    Fordham Urban Law Journal Volume 30 | Number 1 Article 5 2002 Assisted Reproduction in Jewish Law Daniel B. Sinclair Tel Aviv College of Management Academic Studies, Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj Part of the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Daniel B. Sinclair, Assisted Reproduction in Jewish Law, 30 Fordham Urb. L.J. 71 (2002). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol30/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Urban Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Assisted Reproduction in Jewish Law Cover Page Footnote Professor of Jewish and Comparative Biomedical Law, Tel Aviv College of Management Academic Studies, Law School. LL.B. (Hons.); LL.M.; LL.D. Ordained Rabbi and formerly Rabbi of the Edinburgh Hebrew Congregation and Dean of Jews College (London). This article is available in Fordham Urban Law Journal: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol30/iss1/5 ASSISTED REPRODUCTION IN JEWISH LAW Daniel B. Sinclair* I. ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION USING THE HUSBAND'S SPERM ("AIH"): JEWISH AND CATHOLIC POSITIONS This Section is devoted to a survey of Jewish law, or halakhah, in relation to AIH, and a comparative discussion of Jewish and Cath- olic approaches to reproductive technology in general. AIH ac- counts for a small proportion of artificial insemination cases, and is recommended in situations where the husband suffers from ana- tomical defects of his sexual organ or from severe psychological impotence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dying Person in Jewish Law and Ethics Philip J
    Loyola University Chicago Law Journal Volume 37 Article 7 Issue 2 Winter 2006 2006 The hS attered Vessel: The Dying Person in Jewish Law and Ethics Philip J. Bentley Agudas Israel Synagogue Follow this and additional works at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj Part of the Medical Jurisprudence Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Philip J. Bentley, The Shattered Vessel: The Dying Person in Jewish Law and Ethics, 37 Loy. U. Chi. L. J. 433 (2006). Available at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol37/iss2/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola University Chicago Law Journal by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Shattered Vessel: The Dying Person in Jewish Law and Ethics Philip J. Bentley, DD* I. INTRODUCTION On the day when Rabbi died the Rabbis decreed a public fast and offered prayers for heavenly mercy. They furthermore announced that whoever said that Rabbi was dead would be stabbed with a sword. Rabbi's handmaid ascended the roof and prayed: 'The immortals desire Rabbi [to join them] and the mortals desire Rabbi [to remain with them]; may it be the will [of God] that the mortals may overpower the immortals.' When, however, she saw how often he resorted to the privy, painfully taking off his tefillin and putting them on again, she prayed: 'May it be the will [of the Almighty] that the immortals may overpower the mortals.' As the Rabbis incessantly continued their prayers for [heavenly] mercy she took up a jar and threw it down from the roof to the ground.
    [Show full text]
  • History U.S. Food and Drug Administration
    History of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Interviewee: Sara Goldkind, MD Interviewer: Suzanne W. Junod, Ph.D. Date: July 29, 2014 Place: Silver Spring, MD +pr.ll 'iotlVICt,s ,& ('' ~ DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH &. HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service \,~'{- Nationa I Institutes of Health National Library of Medicine Bethesda, Maryland 20894 Deed of Gift Agreement Pertaining to the Oral History Interview of As a conditional gift under Section 231 ofthe Public Health Service Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 238), and subject to the terms, conditions and restrictions hereinafter set forth, I, SAf2.A 'f-~/ ~OUt !Cl.JJf , hereby give, donate, and convey to the National Library of Medicine ('tNLM), acting for and on behalf of the United States of America, all of my rights and title to, and interest in, the information and responses prqyided during the interview conducted at rQA on r.., l~t ol'i ~ do it- and prepared for deposit with the NLM in the form of recording tapes ahd transcripts. This donation includes, but is not limited to, all copyright interests I now possess in the tapes and transcripts. Title to the tapes and transcripts shall pass to the NLM upon their delivery and the acceptance of this deed by the Director, NLM. The Director, NLM, shall accept by signing below. I place no restrictions upon the use of these tapes and transcripts by the NLM. The NLM may, subject only to restrictions placed on it by law or regulation, provide for the preservation, arrangement, repair and rehabilitation, duplication, reproduction, publication, distribution, exhibition, display, and servicing of the tapes and transcripts as may be needful and appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Medical Ethics Avraham Steinberg, M.D
    Jewish Medical Ethics Avraham Steinberg, M.D. A. Definition of the Term The Hebrew term musar in the Bible refers to words of rebuke, teaching and warning1 or the act of punishment for wrongdoing.2 proper conduct in life and includes basic principles concerning such proper conduct, both between man and God, and between man and his fellow man. This section deals with general Jewish ethical principles and those specifically related to the practice of medicine. This subject is nowadays referred to as Jewish medical ethics. B. General Ethical Principles A fundamental difference exists between Judaism and secular philosophical ethics in many facets of life. The basis, validity and source of Jewish ethics is rooted in the belief in God and His Torah whereas the basis of secular ethics is primarily humanism and rational intellect. Jewish ethics and law are derived from the written and oral law (the Bible and the Talmud, respectively), which were divinely given to Moses on Mount Sinai. The Jewish rules of law and principles of ethics include commandments governing the relationship between man and God, some of which have no rational or humanistic explanation, are logical and explainable in humanistic terms.3 The Torah and its precepts are continually interpreted and expanded by the rabbinic Sages of each generation who add protective . 1. Jeremiah 2:30; Zephaniah 3:2; Proverbs 12:1, 19:20 and more. 2. Such as Proverbs 22:15. 3. Explained in Yoma 67b where a distinction is made between mishpat which is a logical appropriate and understandable law, and chok which has no rational basis but is Rashi, Genesis 26:5, Leviticus 18:4 and 19:19 , end of chapter 8.
    [Show full text]