Medical Ethics ZOROASTRIAN BIOETHICS: THE EVOLUTION OF AN ANCIENT ETHIC TO A CODE FOR MODERN SCIENCE AND MEDICINE Whitny M. Braun ∗ Abstract: This paper examines the emerging bioethical code of Zoroastrianism. As the oldest of the monotheistic prophetic traditions Zoroastrianism has over 3000 years of ethical writings and oral traditions, which have yet to be codified into a cohesive bioethical manifesto for the faith. The major topics in bioethics including conception, abortion, circumcision, blood, tissue and organ donation as well as euthanasia and disposal of the dead are examined with attention paid to how the tradition views these issues respective to their sacred texts and current social norms. Keywords: Zoroastrianism, Parsis, Bioethics, Public Health, Abortion, Organ Donation, Euthanasia, Dakhmenashini, INTRODUCTION At first glance the world’s oldest religion and the study of the ethics of scientific advancement might not seem like they have much in common. But in reality they have everything to do with each other. Zoroastrianism is an ancient religion that brings with it the ethics and rituals of the Bronze Age into the 21st century. How does a faith tradition born out of the Central Asian Steppes over 3000 years ago adapt to the rapid advancements being made in the biosciences? Perhaps it does it the same way its younger fellow faith traditions have, by interpreting their ancient ethical codes in a !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! * M.P.H., M.A., EMT and Candidate for PhD in Theology, Ethics and Culture, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California, United States of America. ! 1! manner that creates a normative ethical framework that the estimated 175,000 Zoroastrians living in the world today can operate within.1 Before examining the specific beliefs relating to such issues as abortion, organ donation and disposal of the dead it is important to understand the origins of the field of bioethics and why there is a profound need for a Zoroastrian code of bioethics. THE EVOLUTION OF BIOETHICS The field of “bioethics” first emerged as an academic discipline in the United States in the 1960s in response to the rapid advancements being made in the fields of science and technology. But it was not given a name until 1970 when scientist Van Rensselaer Potter coined the term to refer to confluence of moral, theological and legal reasoning in response to such groundbreaking advances in science as the atomic bomb, the hemodialysis machine and organ transplantation.2 No sooner had Potter fashioned the term than it was appropriated to describe a much narrower scope within the filed: “the ethical analysis of a range of moral questions posed to the medical practice by the advances in the biomedical sciences and technologies”.3 In 1971 the Kennedy Institute of Ethics was founded at Georgetown University to serve as the flagship academic center for research in the new field of medical ethics. The center’s founder chose to call it “bioethics” cementing it as a new and distinct discipline !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! 1!Numbers!based!on!the!research!of!J.!R.!Hinnels!(2000).!Zoroastrian!and!Parsi!Studies.!London,! Ashgate.! ! 2!Potter,!V.!R.!(1970).!"Bioethics,!the!science!of!survival."!Perspectives!in!Biology!and!Medicine!14:! 127M153.! ! ! 3!Jonsen,!A.!R.!(2007).!A!History!of!Bioethics!as!Discipline!and!Discourse.!Bioethics:!an!introduction!to! the!history,!methods!and!practice,!2nd!Edition.!N.!S.!Jecker.!Sudbury,!MA,!Jones!and!Bartlett! Publishers:$3M16.! ! ! 2! within the academy. Shortly thereafter a formal definition was given to the term in the center’s premier publication in 1972, The Encyclopedia of Bioethics, defining it as: “the study of the ethical dimensions of medicine and the biological sciences.”4 Two years later Daniel Callahan, founder of the other major bioethics think tank, The Hastings Center, wrote an article in which he suggested that this new field could develop into a unique and profoundly important discipline, drawing from the traditional methods of philosophical and theological analysis, sensitivity to human emotion and socioeconomic and political influences on medicine and health care.5 By the end of the 1970s the general consensus was that the discipline of bioethics should be designed to serve those who were faced with the crucial decisions that arise within medicine and by extension, measures in public health. RELIGION AND BIOETHICS One sub-discipline that has developed under the umbrella of bioethics is the codification of bioethical norms specific to individual faith traditions. Christians, Jews and Muslims in the United States and Europe have been the most active in the issuing of bioethical mandates, such as the 1995 papal encyclical, Evangelium Vitae6 and the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4!Ibid,!p.!3.! ! 5!Callahan,!D.!(1973).!"Bioethics!as!a!discipline."!Hastings!Center!Studies!1:!66M73.! ! 6!The!papal!encyclical!Evangelium.Vitae!Was!issued!on!March!25,!1995!by!Pope!John!Paul!II.!!It!states! the!Roman!Catholic!position!regarding!the!value!and!inviolability!of!human!life.!!The!encyclical!has! subsequently!been!used!as!the!standard!of!authority!in!all!matters!pertaining!to!abortion,!euthanasia! and!by!extension!the!destruction!of!stem!cells.! ! ! 3! multiple fatawas issued by Muslim clerics since the 1980s.7 But bioethics as a discipline has been accused of being elitist in that the vast majority of research and writing in the field focuses on the Abrahamic traditions’ treatments of the various bioethical issues. Consequently, in recent years there has been a surge in interest in the bioethical codes of “minority groups”. In response to the growing interest in the field of bioethics among Christian and Jewish scholars several other scholars emerged as bioethicists for their respective faith traditions. In the 1980s Muslim scholars such as Hassan Hathout8 and Abdulaziz Sachedina9 became recognized as leading voices in the sub-discipline of Muslim bioethics. By the 1990s Cromwell Crawford10 and Damien Keown11 had established themselves as the preeminent authorities on Hindu and Buddhist bioethics respectively. And in the last decade others have emerged in the fields of Jain and Confucian bioethics.12 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 7!See:!RisplerMChaim,!V.!(2003).!The!Right!Not!to!Be!Born:!Abortion!of!the!Disadvantaged!Fetus!in! Contemporary!FatWas!Islamic!Ethics!of!Life:!Abortion,!War,!and!Euthanasia.!J.!E.!Brockopp.!Columbia,! SC,!University!of!South!Carolina!Press.! ! ! 8!See:!Hathout,!H.!(1981).!The!International!Code!for!Medical!and!Health!Ethics.!KuWait,!Islamic! Organization!for!Medical!Sciences.! ! 9!See:!Sachedina,!A.!(2009).!Islamic!Bioemedical!Ethics:!Principles!and!Application.!Oxford,!Oxford! University!Press.! ! 10!See:!CraWford,!S.!C.!(2003).!Hindu!Bioethics!for!the!TWentyMfirst!Century.!Ithaca,!NY,!State! University!of!NeW!York!Press.! ! ! 11!See:!KeoWn,!D.!(2001).!Buddhism!and!Bioethics.!London,!Palgrave.! ! ! 12!See:!Braun,!W.!(2008).!"Sallekhana:!the!Ethicality!and!Legality!of!Religious!Suicide!by!Starvation!in! the!Jain!Religious!Community."!Medicine!and!LaW!27(4):!913M924.!;!“Jain!Bioethics!for!the!21st! Century.”!!Medicine!and!LaW,!Pending!Publication.!!Also!see:!Fan,!R.,!Ed.!(1999).!Confucian!Bioethics.! Philosophy!and!Medicine.!Dordrecht,!NL,!Kluwer!Academic!Publishers.! ! ! ! 4! From a purely intellectual and philosophical standpoint the descriptive ethics of the world’s major faith traditions may have made for interesting reading, however there was a disconnect for physicians, nurses, and all other healthcare providers who were encountering members of these religious and cultural groups in the clinical setting. Through the process of globalization healthcare providers the world over were encountering an increasingly diverse patient population and each faith tradition, ethnic group and religious denomination represented in the hospital was proving to be a brave new world of ethical norms. The need to understand the bioethical norms of what were then termed “fringe” groups first became apparent to healthcare providers in the West when blood transfusions became a reality in the early 20th century.13 While it was hailed as a miracle of modern science it raised myriad ethical and theological questions owing to the fact that blood is so symbolically intertwined with cultural, ethnic and religious identities. The first group to publicly admonish the practice were the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who starting in 1927 began sending out their denominational bulletin The Watchtower, which admonished the “eating of blood”.14 The concept of “eating blood” was later clarified in 1944 so as to be tantamount to transfusion: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 13!The!first!documented!successful!blood!transfusion!took!place!in!November!of!1906!When!a!young! Cleveland!surgeon,!George!Washington!Crile,!published!the!results!of!his!attempt!to!save!the!life!of!a! 23MyearMold!man!by!surgically!connecting!the!patient’s!brachial!artery!to!his!brother’s.!!For!more! information!see:!Susan!E.!Lederer!(2008).!Flesh!and!Blood:!Organ!Transplantation!and!Blood! Transfusion!in!Twentieth!Century!America.!NeW!York,!NY,!Oxford!University!Press.! ! ! 14!Muramoto,!O.!(1998).!"Bioethics!of!the!refusal!of!blood!by!Jehovah's!Witnesses:!Part!I."!Journal!of! Medical!Ethics!24(4):!223M231.!!It!is!also!important!to!note!that!While!the!paper!cites!Jehovah’s! Witnesses!as!the!first!group!to!admonish!the!practice!it!Was!actually!the!Christian!Scientists!Who!first!