Current Academic Relevance of Personalist Bioethics. Quantitative Analysis and Comparison with Elio Sgreccia’s Original Proposal
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Ontological personalism and personalist bioethics place the human person at the center of ethical considerations, advocating respect that reflects the intrinsic dignity and value of the person. This paper seeks to quantitatively evidence what is the academic influence of BPOF in today’s world and what is the vision that current bioethicists, considered personalists, have of BPOF itself, in order to establish a comparison with the original proposal. This helps us to better understand their criticisms and updates to favor a better understanding of the BPOF proposal and its dialogue with today’s world. The number of publications shows the influence of the BPOF in the academic world. The analysis of these reveals that many of the bioethical publications catalogued as personalist are not specific to the BPOF, as they lack the foundation, methodology or argumentation of the BPOF itself. This lack can lead to these singular proposals not being truly effective in the defense and promotion of the dignity of every human being, in addition to generating confusion in the understanding of the BPOF due to its lack of unity.
Downloads
PLUMX Metrics
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Medicina y Ética is distributed under a Creative Commons License Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional.
The author keeps the property rights with no restriction whatsoever and guarantees the magazine the right to be the first publication of the work. The author is free to deposit the published version in any other medium, such as an institutional archive or on his own website.
References
Sgreccia E. Manual de Bioética I. Fundamentos e ética biomédica. 4o ed. San Pablo: Loyola; 2016.
Sgreccia E. Manual de Bioética II: Aspectos médicos sociais. San Pablo: Loyola; 2014.
Bermeo Antury E. Aportes del personalismo ontológico moderno a la bioética personalista [Tesis doctoral]. Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid; 2019.
Muñoz Torres A. Pertinencia de las publicaciones de bioética: análisis del contenido epistemológico [Tesis doctoral]. México: Anáhuac; 2017.
Pastor LMT. Reflections on the complementarity between education and bioethics. [Reflexiones sobre la complementariedad entre la educación y la bioética]. Opción. 2016; 32:768–83. Disponible en: https://produccioncientificaluz.org/index.php/opcion/article/view/22072
Sanches MA, Monteiro TM. Visões antropológicas divergentes em artigos científicos de bioética no Brasil. Pers Bioét. 2019; 23(1):64–83. https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2019.23.1.5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2019.23.1.5
Gómez-Tatay L. Ethical issues of synthetic biology: a personalist perspective (Tesis doctoral) [Internet]. Valencia: Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir; 2019. Disponible en: https://riucv.ucv.es/bitstream/handle/20.500.12466/384/Tesis%20LUCIA%20G%C3%93MEZ%20TATAY.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Gómez-Tatay L, Hernández-Andreu JM, Aznar J. A personalist ontological approach to synthetic biology. Bioethics. 2016; 30(6):397–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12230 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12230
Giglio F. Bioethical perspective of ontologically-based personalism. Bioeth Upda- te. 2017; 3(1):59–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bioet.2017.01.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioet.2017.01.001
Gómez-Tatay L, Hernández-Andreu JM, Aznar J. The conception of synthetic entities from a personalist perspective. Sci Eng Ethics. 2017; 25(1):97–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9994-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9994-z
Sanches MA, Cunha TR, Siqueira SS, Siqueira JE. Perspectivas bioéticas sobre tomada de decisão em tempos de pandemia. Rev Bioét. 2020; 28(3):410–7. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422020283401 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422020283401
Amo Usanos R. De la biofilosofía a la bioética: el concepto de vida humana y su repercusión en la bioética [Tesis doctoral]. Madrid: Universidad Rey Juan Carlos; 2015.
Robles Morejón JB. Contribution of Stein’s anthropology to personalistic bioethics. [Aportaciones de la Antropología Steiniana a la Bioética Personalista]. Cuad Bioet Rev Of Asoc Espanola Bioet Etica Medica. 2016; 27(90):195–205. Disponible en: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27637194/
Di Pietro ML, Teleman AA, Gonzalez-Melado FJ, Zace D, Di Raimo FR, Lucidi V, et al. Implementing carrier screening for cystic fibrosis outside the clinic: ethical analysis in the light of the personalist view. Clin Ter. 2018; 169(2):e71–6. https://doi.org/10.7417/t.2018.2057
Di Nardo M, Dalle Ore A, Testa G, Annich G, Piervincenzi E, Zampini G, et al. Principlism and Personalism. Comparing Two Ethical Models Applied Clinically in Neonates Undergoing Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support. Front Pediatr [Internet]. 2019; 7. Disponible en: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fped.2019.00312 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2019.00312
Stein E. La estructura de la persona humana. Em: Obras Completas IV Escritos antropológicos y pedagógicos. Burgos, Madrid, Victoria: Monte Carmelo, –EDE– El Carmen; 2003.
Burgos Velasco JM, Crosby JF, Allen RT. An introduction to personalism [Internet]. Washington: CUA Press; 2018. Disponible en: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/anahuac-ebooks/reader.action?docID=5241224&ppg=1&query=An%20introduction%20to%20personalism
Vásquez HT, Tirado Acero M, Trujillo Florián S. Criminal radical functionalism from bioethics. [El funcionalismo radical penal a partir de la bioética]. Rev Repub. 2018; 25:179–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.21017/Rev.Repub.2018.v25.a55 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21017/Rev.Repub.2018.v25.a55
Valera L, Terranova C. An ethical dilemma in the field of gynecology. Pers Bioét. 2016; 20(1):62–9. https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2016.20.1.6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2016.20.1.6
Sgreccia E. Personalist Bioethics: Foundations and Applications. Philadelphia: The National Catholic Bioethics Center; 2012.
Floris P.Il “paradigma Englaro”:scelte personali, regole eticheeris poste giuridiche. Quad Dirit E Polit Eccles. 2015; 18(1):173–96. Disponible en: https://www.academia.edu/116834492/Sulla_legittimita_dell_alimentazione_coatta_del_detenuto
Petrini C, Costa AN. The “new charter for health care workers” and the ethics of organ donation and transplantation. Ann Dell Istituto Super Sanità. 2018; 54(2):79– 81. https://doi.org/10.4415/ANN_18_02_01
Reig Mezquida JP, Sales Badía G, Tudela Cuenca J. Age limitation to lung transplant recipients. ethical aspects. [Limitación por edad en trasplante de pulmón. Aspectos éticos]. Rev Of Asoc Espanola Bioet Etica Medica. 2020; 31(101):43– 56. https://doi.org/10.30444/CB.51
Insua JT. Principlism, Personalist Bioethics and Principles of Action in Medicine and Health Services. Pers Bioét. 2018; 22(2):223–46. https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2018.22.2.3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2018.22.2.3
Ríos Uriarte ME. Reflexiones en torno a la posibilidad de un neopersonalismo desde la bioética personalista. Med Ética Rev Int Bioét Deontol Ética Médica. 2018; 29(1):189–206. Disponible en: https://revistas.anahuac.mx/bioetica/issue/ view/98
Pérez Bermejo M. El debate en bioética. El personalismo en el pensamiento de Elio Sgreccia. Entrevista a Elio Sgreccia. Med Ética Rev Int Bioét Deontol Ética Médica. 2018; 29(1):143–58. Disponible en: https://revistas.anahuac.mx/index.php/bioetica/issue/view/98/Vol%2029%201
Gavlik Mendes MW. Atualidade da bioética personalista ontologicamente fundada. Visão atual e reflexões com vista a sua maior expansão. Roma: APRA; 2024.