What is the role of bioethics in the face of persistent ethical disagreement?

2nd Ethox-Uehiro workshop on disagreement

Registration required. Contact us for details.

What, if anything, can bioethics contribute to academic and public discussion in the face of apparently irresolvable disagreement on contentious issues? At different times and in different contexts, some bioethical issues become very polarizing. The most obvious example in recent years is transgender care (especially for minors), but enduring issues such as abortion or end of life care are subject to the same tension.

Some of these issues, for instance whether and when the use of puberty blockers is ethically acceptable, are relatively recent. Thus, there might be scope for exploring arguments on either side of the controversy, which might help better characterise – or perhaps even resolve? – some points of disagreement. However, is that a realistic expectation? After all, on some issues where disagreement and polarization persist, there is a longstanding bioethical literature where it seems that all the arguments for or against either side have been presented, analysed, and criticised in depth. Yet, strong disagreement on fundamental points often remains. Notwithstanding questions about the possibility or likelihood of achieving agreement, clarification of the issues and of relevant arguments can be an important achievement.

In this workshop we will discuss what, if any, bioethics’ potential contribution is to addressing deep disagreement on controversial issues, and what obstacles exist to such contribution. Issues such as limited diversity of views in academic debates or fear of reputational damage by academics with minoritarian views might contribute to explaining the limited role played by bioethics so far in understanding disagreement. However, other factors might be present.

We will use the workshop to explore a miniature application of the process of “adversarial cooperation” which has been recently proposed for addressing points of moral disagreement fruitfully (Parker 2024) and is going to be the focus of an ANTITHESES workpackage, Adversarial cooperation, led by Michael Parker and Patricia Kingori. We will look to encourage the expression of diverse viewpoints and different kinds of experiences, understandings, and means of communicating viewpoints. The debate about transgender care will be used as a case study. However, aim of this workshop is not to argue for or against either side of such controversy, but to focus on bioethics’ specific role in academic and societal discussion of the topic and to explore applications of “adversarial cooperation” (Parker 2024).

Read a blog from the first Ethox-Uehiro Workshop on Disagreement, The Fruits of Moral Disagreement, which took place on 11 June 2024.

Reference

• Parker, M. (2024). “Bioethics and the value of disagreement” Journal of Medical Ethics, https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2024-110174

Schedule

• 1.00pm: Lunch 
• 2.00pm: Welcome and aims of the workshop Ethox Centre and Uehiro Institute Directors
• 2.05pm Setting the stage and coproducing the process Alberto Guibilini, Uehiro Institute
• 2.20pm Value topography exploration David Albert Jones, Anscombe Bioethics Centre
• 3.20pm Coffee break
• 3.45pm Next normative step formulation Whole group discussion
• 4.30pm Implementation, reflection, and evaluation Whole group discussion 
• 5.00pm Workshop close Ethox Centre & Uehiro Institute Directors

Registration required. Contact us for details.

• authors: S Abdool Karim (JHU), T Johnson (Ethox), M Alvarado (Cambridge) and A Barnhill (JHU)
• organisation: Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University
• title of paper: Recognizing the ethical complexity of food policies and the role of the food industry
• Wellcome grant reference number: 221719
• Journal/publisher name: Health Promotion International, Oxford University Press
• proposed date of publication: unknown
• cost of the open access fee: EUR 4 533