Antommaria Armand H Matheny
The University of Utah, USA.
Am J Bioeth. 2004 Winter;4(1):W24-7. doi: 10.1162/152651604773067523.
The American Society for Bioethics and Humanities debated for several years about whether it should adopt positions and, if so, on what range of issues. The membership recently approved an amendment to its bylaws permitting the Society to adopt positions on matters related to academic freedom and professionalism but not on substantive moral and policy issues. This resolution is problematic for a number of reasons, including the lack of a categorical difference between these types of claims and the Society's inability to speak on behalf of patients and research subjects. The implementation of the amendment also raises several issues. The Society will need to refrain from speaking too specifically and to articulate the responsibilities of its members. If the Society fails to address these concerns, it runs the risk of denigrating its public image and that of the profession.
美国生物伦理与人文学会就其是否应表明立场以及如果表明立场，应针对哪些问题范围，进行了数年的辩论。该学会成员最近批准了其章程的一项修正案，允许学会就与学术自由和专业精神相关的事项表明立场，但不就实质性的道德和政策问题表明立场。这项决议存在诸多问题，包括这些类型的主张之间缺乏绝对差异，以及学会无法代表患者和研究对象发声。修正案的实施也引发了若干问题。学会需要避免说得过于具体，并阐明其成员的责任。如果学会未能解决这些问题，就有损害其公众形象以及该专业公众形象的风险。
