Abstract
In the spirit of a “Bioethics Forecast,” at the beginning of 2017 I made some
predictions for what would keep us bioethicists busy for the rest of the year
(Camporesi 2017). Of course, as with most predictions, most of mine missed the
mark. As 2017 comes to a close and we prepare to turn the page and welcome the
new year, it is worth looking back at some of them to reflect on the main
bioethics, and biopolitics, features of this year. Of the ten forecasts I made at the
beginning of 2017, in my role as Associate Editor for Ethics and Reproduction I
will comment only on those pertaining to reproductive ethics. I will then
conclude with some more general reflections on the state of bioethics.
Disclaimer: many of the topics below are skewed towards the United
Kingdom, the country where I work.
predictions for what would keep us bioethicists busy for the rest of the year
(Camporesi 2017). Of course, as with most predictions, most of mine missed the
mark. As 2017 comes to a close and we prepare to turn the page and welcome the
new year, it is worth looking back at some of them to reflect on the main
bioethics, and biopolitics, features of this year. Of the ten forecasts I made at the
beginning of 2017, in my role as Associate Editor for Ethics and Reproduction I
will comment only on those pertaining to reproductive ethics. I will then
conclude with some more general reflections on the state of bioethics.
Disclaimer: many of the topics below are skewed towards the United
Kingdom, the country where I work.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Journal of Bioethical Inquiry |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue number | 7 |
| Early online date | 26 Jan 2018 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 26 Jan 2018 |
Keywords
- reproduction
- genome editing
- human embryos
- public trust
- non invasive prenatal testing
- NIPT
- pregnancy
- prenatal screening
- reproductive ethics