Unethical Bioethicists? Take a Look to the Right
There has been a lot of handwringing over the past few years about conflicts of interest on the part of bioethicists. Nearly all attention has focused on the role of private companies especially pharmaceutical companies in funding either bioethics centers, bioethics research or bioethicists acting as consultants. What has garnered very little attention is the role of explicitly political foundations in supporting bioethics work. The most obvious example is the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington which has been aggressively expanding its bioethics activities and is closely allied to some of the members of the President's Council on Bioethics.Is it a conflict of interest to claim to speak as a bioethicist or to conduct research under the auspices of explicitly political funding sources? Should these funding sources be disclosed in all public presentations? What about in offering opinions to the media? Does receipt of funding from these sources in the form of awards, grants, salaries or other renumeration constitute grounds for dismissal from public commissions and organizations?
Here is the breakdown on EPPC:
According to Media Transparency, most of EPPC's funding comes from the so-called "four sisters" of the
conservative foundation world: the Olin, Bradley, Smith Richardson, and Sarah Scaife foundations. The center is also supported by the Castle Rock and Earhart foundations.
So if you are planning to attend the big "ethics of bioethics" meeting in Albany in about a month, take a look at the biggest non-governmental investment in bioethics: conservative advocacy foundations. - Art Caplan
contribute a comment
Comments have been closed for this post.
comments
Very interesting and helps to explain my questions about any lack of substancial ethical opinions rendered in regard to genomic acivity. Maybe that is why I have felt compelled to be that voice.
- by Greg Smith on Mar 4, 2005 at 1:46 AM | link