Siegal Gil
Haifa University Law School, Mount Carmel, Haifa, Israel.
Harefuah. 2004 Feb;143(2):142-6, 165.
In an attempt to re-structure and formulate western bio-ethics in the '80's, the four principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy and justice were promulgated in North America and the United Kingdom. Extensive criticism was leveled against this endeavor, as being erroneous in principle or substantially inadequate. Furthermore, European opponents of this effort claimed that the Continent's 'true' set of values greatly differs from those of North America, hence negating attempts for global bio-ethics based on these principles. In this review the principles of modern American bio-ethics are presented and criticisms presently deliberated in Europe are introduced, while offering alternative principles. Israel's unique position is demonstrated by its legislation on issues such as the national health system, organ transplantation, the right to refuse medical treatment and stem cell research, all confirming that Israel begs to differ. We conclude that European values have much in common with Israel's tradition and culture, commending due modification of our ethical conceptions and training programs. The coming years should be characterized by constant dialogue between the proponents of European and American values, while Israel's individual standpoint is maintained.
20世纪80年代,为了重新构建和阐述西方生物伦理学,北美和英国颁布了有益、无害、自主和公正这四项原则。这项努力遭到了广泛批评,有人认为其在原则上有误,或在实质上存在不足。此外,欧洲反对这项努力的人声称,欧洲大陆“真正”的价值观与北美有很大不同,因此否定了基于这些原则构建全球生物伦理学的尝试。在这篇综述中,我们介绍了现代美国生物伦理学的原则,引入了目前欧洲正在讨论的批评意见,同时提出了替代原则。以色列在国家卫生系统、器官移植、拒绝医疗的权利和干细胞研究等问题上的立法表明了其独特立场,所有这些都证实以色列有不同看法。我们得出结论,欧洲价值观与以色列的传统和文化有许多共同之处,建议对我们的伦理观念和培训计划进行适当修改。未来几年的特点应该是欧美价值观的支持者之间持续对话,同时保持以色列的独特立场。