The bioethical committee as an institute for social control of technological innovations in medicine: law analysis

Publication type Article
Status Published
Occupation: Chief Researcher
Affiliation: Institute of State and Law Research, Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Journal nameGosudarstvo i pravo
EditionIssue 4

The article provides a general description and classification of bioethical committees from the point of view of the subject and goals of their activities, the nature of their authority, legal status, organizational and legal foundations of their activity. The bioethical committee is interpreted as a special institutional form of organizing scientific (interdisciplinary) and public understanding of moral and legal problems in the field of medicine, generated by technological innovations. In the system of social control the bioethical committee is a social institution that is either integrated into the system of public administration, or creates its own channels of influence on the position of the professional medical community and public opinion. From this point of view the article analyzes foreign and Russian history of bioethics committees institutionalization. The author interprets bioethics as a field of scientific and practical activity, the social purpose of which is to translate actual bioethical dilemmas, unsolvable on the basis of abstract principles, into the communicative space, where a consensus can be based on common moral intuitions. The article substantiates the thesis that the main intention of bioethics and bioethics committees, as an expression of its practical function, is to find a legal solution to problems. The author made proposals for improving the legal support for the creation and operation of bioethical committees in Russia.

Keywordsethics committee, bioethics committee, social control, morality, bioethics, bioethical dilemma, expertise, state control, legal status, organizational and legal basis of activity
Publication date11.05.2022
Number of characters53160
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 417

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Aristotle. Nicomachean ethics // Aristotle. Essays. M., 1983. Vol. 4. P. 82, 83 (in Russ.).

2. Bryzgalina E.V. Questions of life and death: why bioethics is needed. URL: "mnenia...voprosy-zhizni-i-smerti...bioetika (accessed: 11.10.2021) (in Russ.).

3. Vvedenskaya E. Genetic editing. Is it permissible to interfere with the heredity of people // System. September 2021. P. 43 (in Russ.).

4. Volskaya E. Ethical committees as regulators of biomedical research. URL: https://www.› jour ›announcement›view (accessed: 12.10.2021) (in Russ.).

5. Guardini R. The end of modern times // Questions of philosophy. 1990. No. 4. P. 149 (in Russ.).

6. Grebenshchikova E.G. Socio-humanitarian contours of technoscience: relevance of humanitarian expertise // Knowledge. Understanding. Skill. 2018. No. 1. P. 29 (in Russ.).

7. Grebenshchikova E.G. Ethical expertise in biomedicine. URL:›Analytics and comments" (accessed: 17.06.2021) (in Russ.).

8. Ignatiev V.N., Yudin B.G. Bioethics // New Philosophical Encyclopedia. M., 2000. Vol. 1. P. 268, 269 (in Russ.).

9. Iltis A. Ethics and politics of Aristotle: bioethics in the modern state // History of Medicine. 2015. Vol. 2. No. 4. P. 547 (in Russ.).

10. Kiyashchenko L.P. Forms of existence of biophilosophy today // Philosophical problems of biology and medicine. Issue 12: between biophilosophy and bioethics: collection of art. M., 2018. P. 52 (in Russ.).

11. Kiyashchenko L.P., Moiseev V.I. Philosophy of transdisciplinarity. M., 2009. P. 17 (in Russ.).

12. Lapaeva V.V. The right of technogenic civilization before the challenges of technological dehumanization // Law. HSE Journal. 2021. No. 3. P. 4–35 (in Russ.).

13. Lapaeva V.V. The system of human rights before the challenges of biotechnological improvement of human nature // Man. 2021. Vol. 32. No. 6. P. 178 - 189 (in Russ.).

14. Letov O. Problems of bioethics (review) // Social and Humanitarian Sciences. Domestic and foreign literature. Ser. “Philosophy”: Abstract. journal. M., 2019. P. 100 (in Russ.).

15. Mersiyanova A.P. The main signs of existential choice // Bulletin of the Tomsk State University. 2010. No. 335. P. 154 (in Russ.).

16. Montgomery J. Modification of the human genome: challenges from the human rights sphere caused by scientific and technical achievements // Precedents of the European Court of Human Rights. Spec. vol. “Human rights and biomedicine”. 2018. P. 30 (in Russ.).

17. Nersesyants V.S. Philosophy of Law: libertarian legal concept // Questions of philosophy. 2002. No. 3. P. 3–15 (in Russ.).

18. Nersesyants V.S. Philosophy of Law: textbook for universities. M., 2006. P. 44 (in Russ.).

19. On the procedure for conducting biomedical research in humans // Bulletin of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Ministry of Health of Russia. 2002. No. 3 (in Russ.).

20. Razin A.V. Moral dilemmas // Herald of the RUDN. Ser. “Philosophy”. 2014. No. 2. P. 67 (in Russ.).

21. Romanovsky G.B., Romanovskaya O.V. Christian axiology, constitutional values and modern biomedicine: new risks and threats // The State. Church. Law. M., 2021. P. 134–137 (in Russ.).

22. Guidelines for Ethics Committees / ed. by A.L. Khokhlov. M., 2021. P. 58 - 71 (in Russ.).

23. Guidelines for the work of ethics committees conducting the examination of biomedical research (item 2). Geneva, 2000. URL: "Document/?doc_id=31661794 (accessed: 11/19/2021) (in Russ.).

24. Sedova N.N. Legal foundations of the creation of ethical committees // Medical Law. 2004. No. 1 (in Russ.).

25. Sidorova T.A. Transintervality of the norm in bioethics // Transdisciplinarity in philosophy and science: approaches, problems, prospects / ed. by V. Bazhanov, R. Scholts. M., 2015. P. 346 (in Russ.).

26. Sinyukova N.A. Ethical committees and conflicts of modern medicine // Journal of Siberian Medical Sciences. 2018. No. 2. P. 67, 70 (in Russ.).

27. Tishchenko P.D. Bio-power in the era of biotechnology. M., 2001. P. 73, 74 (in Russ.).

28. Habermas Yu. Moral consciousness and communicative action. SPb., 2006. P. 275 (in Russ.).

29. Ethical committees as regulators of biomedical research // Website of the Center for Pharmacoeconomical Research //"index...komitety-kak-regulatory... (accessed: 10.11.2021) (in Russ.).

30. Aulisio M.P. Why Did Hospital Ethics Committees Emerge in the US? URL: https://www.›…Why…Ethics_Committees_Emerge…US (accessed: 17.09.2021).

31. Basic ethical principles in european bioethics and biolaw. Vol. I. Autonomy, dignity, integrity and vulnerability. Barcelona, 2000. URL: https://www.›preview/2253054/ (accessed:19.11.2021).

32. Beauchamp Т., Childress J. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford, 1979.

33. Elgharib M. National Bioethics Committees // Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics // URL: https://www.›…Committees_National_Bioethics… (accessed: 16.09.2021)).

34. Gleason S.J., Keegan W.J. Bioethics: Ethical Consider THICS: Ethical Considerations of Ventilator Triage During a Pandemic // Georgia State University Law Review. 2020. Vol. 37. Is. 1. P. 178, 179, 182.

35. Levine С. The Seattle ‘God Committee’: A Cautionary Tale. URL: https://www.›details/perma_cc_5P8F-M8ZE (accessed: 17.10.2021).

36. Thamp S.J. Secularization of Bioethics: A Critical History. URL: https://www.›…Secularization…Bioethics_A_Critical… (accessed: 16.09.2021).

37. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals. URL: https://www.›recommendations/archives/2008_urm.pdf (accessed: 15.10.2021).

Система Orphus