What characterises “quality” in ethics education?

I recently read Ercan Avci‘s 2017 paper Learning from experiences to determine quality in ethics education (International Journal of Ethics Education 2:3-16). Avci, from Duquesne University, conducted a literature review looking for shared characteristics in peer-reviewed, full text articles with “ethics education”, “ethics teaching” or “ethics learning” in the title and “ethics” or “ethics education” in the keywords during the period 2010-2015 (which the author describes as the “the last five years”, though it looks like six years to me). A total of 34 papers were examined, drawn from 11 academic disciplines and 10 countries (plus 3 international studies). As one might anticipate, the USA was the most represented geographical context, and healthcare (Nursing, Medicine, etc) was the discipline with the highest number of studies. I was a little surprised to see that none of the reports were from the UK.

As the author himself points out, this is a rather eclectic mix of settings. This might be spun either as an advantage (e.g. capturing diversity) or as a limitation (when it comes to drawing universal lessons). Notwithstanding these issues, Avci makes a number of important observations, some of which resonate with my own experience (e.g. see the Notes for the Tutor section, p16 onwards, in my contribution to the 2011 book Effective Learning in the Life Sciences).

AVCI

Taking a step back, there is an initial question before examining the quality of any ethics programme, namely is ethics being taught at all? It is apparent that many courses – even in Medicine, even in the States – do not include a formal ethics component. However, a broad range of subjects are now including some ethics in their teaching. Continue reading

Advertisements

When is the right time to stop taking antibiotics?

Press coverage has picked up on an interesting paper The antibiotic course has had its day published in the British Medical Journal (online 26th July 2017). The paper was of interest to me as I studied antibiotic resistance for my PhD, and this topic was also the theme of (to date) my only appearance on TV news.

bmjab

As anyone who has ever been prescribed antibiotics ought to know, current clinical practice from the World Health Organisation and others recommends completion of the course (often 7 days), even if the patient feels better sooner. The justification for this strategy has been concern that premature ending of treatment might allow the disease-causing bacteria to recover and continue to wreak havoc, possibly in a newly-resistant manner.

In the new paper, Martin Llewelyn (Brighton and Sussex Medical School) and colleagues from a number of institutions in South-East England question the basis of this recommendation. Whereas the link between exposure to antibacterials and the development of resistance is well documented, these authors wondered about the origins of the original advice. They suggest that the requirement to “complete the course” probably stands on little more than the anecdotal experience of some of the antibiotic pioneers. Continue reading

Review of “Biological Determinism”

The forthcoming edition of The New Bioethics has a review of Biological Determinism, Free Will and Moral Responsibility in which it is described as “informative and engrossing”.

TNBreview

 

Who wants to be a transhumanist postman?

I was recently looking through the new collection Rethinking Cognitive Enhancement when I had an uncontrolled laugh out loud moment in the University library. Flicking through the index I saw a reference to Bostrom’s Why I want to be a postman when I grow up.  As readers may know, Oxford academic Nick Bostrom is a leading light of the transhumanist movement.  His paper Why I want to be a posthuman when I grow up (copy via this link) is somewhat different.

To the best of my knowledge, Bostrom has no desire to be delivering letters in his enhanced state!

bostrom

Another great review for Where Science and Ethics Meet

CQcoverThe July 2017 edition of the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics has recently gone live. It contains a lovely review of our book Where Science and Ethics Meet, written by Tom Cole of the McGovern Center for Humanities and Ethics, University of Texas.

Cole generously calls this “the best introduction to the topic I have ever seen”.  Commenting on the fictional case studies that introduce each chapter, he notes “These scenarios are far more imaginative and narrated than most bioethics cases: they are so well written that readers will inevitably want to turn the pages”.

Interestingly, he also draws attention to the fact that both my co-author Salvador Macip and I have “dual training”; Sal is a qualified medical doctor and an author of both popular science and science fiction in Catalonia (as well as conducting research into ageing and cancer… busy man!) and I have an MA in Ethics alongside my PhD in Biochemistry. This, Cole suggests, may place us in an especially strong position to discuss the underlying science in an appropriate manner for a lay audience.

This link takes you (I believe) to a preview of the first page of the article which, since this is a one-page review, actually constitutes the full text.

More plaudits for Where Science and Ethics Meet

The February edition of The Biochemist (magazine of the Biochemical Society) included another very positive review of our book Where Science and Ethics Meet: Dilemmas at the frontiers of medicine and biology. The review notes that “Willmott and Macip fulfil their promise of providing epistemologically balanced tools to the reader” and concludes that the book “certainly represents a valuable tool for teaching ethics at the undergraduate level and for engaging a wider audience in the challenges arising from scientific and biotechnical developments” which is gratifying since this was exactly our ambition in writing the book.

review-of-where-science-and-ethics-meet-biochemist_feb2017

Stroke and Personhood

fasttooTV viewers in the UK will likely have noted that the Public Health England “Act F.A.S.T.” adverts promoting stroke awareness are back on our screens. The campaign has run periodically since 2009* and emphasises the importance of knowing the signs that someone is having a stroke – Face (has their face fallen on one side?), Arms (can they raise both arms and keep them there?), Speech (is their speech slurred?), Time to call 999.

The campaign has evolved over the years. For example, a broader ethnic range of characters experiencing stroke was introduced in 2014.

This year there has been a highly significant additional change. Did you spot it? The final tag line for the advert has been altered from “The faster you act, the more of the person you save” to  “The faster you act, the better their chances“.

The change is subtle, but hugely important. The previous version reinforces a perception that someone who has suffered a stroke is somehow less human they were before. This is ableist and reflect a view of personhood that considers, albeit unintentionally, someone with a disability as less of a person than those who are able-bodied. I welcome this change and congratulate Public Health England for correcting this error.

 

*Official analysis of the impact of the Act F.A.S.T. campaign has been mixed. In 2012 the government reported an increase in stroke-related calls to the 999 emergency number,  however a qualitative study published the following year was more sceptical (see  Dombrowski et al (2013) BMC Public Health 13:915).

 

  • Awards

    The Power of Comparative Genomics received a Special Commendation

  • May 2018
    M T W T F S S
    « Apr    
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    28293031