Therese Lysaught, The New Bioethics
“One of the great mysteries … is why some people stand up for what is right while others do not” (p. 168). So ends Bioethics in Action. The greater mystery called out in this book, is why many of those who do not stand up are, by profession, bioethicists. In this volume, editors Françoise Baylis and Alice Dreger have gather eight original first-person narrative written by those who did stand up for what they thought right.
Jacob M. Appel, American Journal of Bioethics
Bioethics in Action is more than a collection of rousing first-hand narratives. Rather, the editors also offer a stinging critique of colleagues who do not share their approach. They write of their “shared frustration” with “sexy bioethics micro-punditry” and of a field that is “increasingly measured by external grants and (secondarily) peer-reviewed publications, and within the public realm as sporty commentary on oversimplified medical controversies purposefully dramatized to increase media outlets’ ad revenues. Strong words. They describe “an active schism” that “appears to be forming” among those “who are identified as bioethicists”
Sheldon Krimsky, Accountability in Research
Bioethics is a late 20th century field that grew out of philosophy and applied medical ethics. Philosophy transcends disciplinary turfs. Those trained in the history of ethics translate their theoretical knowledge to address practical ethical problems in the fields of biology, including genetics and neuroscience, environmental sciences, human and animal experiments and ecology.
Ewa Posner, Medical Law Review
They make it clear in their opening chapter that this is not a book where theoretical concepts will be pondered, turned over, and analysed in detail. Rather, it is a book about ‘real world’ ethical dilemmas and ethicists who are trying to influence the course of events around these dilemmas. In essence, it is a historical book as it deals with past events and recounts them with a hope that the spotlight provided here will help to direct us to ‘better’ paths and ‘better’ outcomes than described herein.