Suchergebnisse

The explosion of the Covid-19 pandemic has led us to introduce numerous states of exception in our everyday lives, sparking debates about their appropriateness at various levels. Among other changes we have adopted, there has been an increase of apps supporting our fight against Covid-19 all over the world. From apps helping us to join and coordinate clinical trials to contact tracing apps, various are the instances in which digital technology has -at least attempted to- come to rescue to the scientific, public policy and political realms during the challenging times we are currently living in. Particularly in relation to contact tracing apps, ethical concerns have been raised over the level of transparency that they can guarantee, often stressing how the State needs to ensure a number of variables to be granted to citizens: from privacy to fairness of access and distribution through their compulsory status or not. In Western liberal democracies, the assumption has been that all risks associated with this digital technology would have to be dealt with by the State -hence making its misuse "only" public, albeit authoritarian in their most dystopian versions. Here, the intention is to stress some of the overlooked dimensions of the use of different types of Covid-19 related apps. More specifically, this paper takes issue with the secondary use of data that various private companies engaged in the fight against Covid-19 could make -with an unclear role for informed consent. Especially when in the hands of private, for profit, companies, attention should abound on what states of exceptions we are allowing to slip through our ethical supervision -and to what we are actually giving consent to when downloading these apps.

Fragen der Bioethik spielen eine entscheidende Rolle bei persönlichen Entscheidungen und in politischen Zusammenhängen. Das Ziel dieses Booklets ist es, eine Einführung in die zentralen Problemfelder der Bioethik zu geben und dabei hauptsächlich die Schnittmenge zwischen Ethik und Technologie zu fokussieren. Nach dem Lesen des Booklets sind Leser_innen mit den konzeptionellen Werkzeugen ausgestattet, die es braucht, um die wichtigsten Debatten in Ethik und Technologie sowie die wichtigsten Positionen im Diskurs zu verstehen und einen eigenen Standpunkt einzunehmen. Das Booklet ist in fünf Themen untergliedert: Künstliche Intelligenz, Robotik, Menschliche Verbesserung, Gentechnik und Umweltethik sowie Entwicklungen in den Neurowissenschaften. Hierbei werden den Kontroversen in diesen Themenfeldern besondere Aufmerksamkeit gewidmet und verschiedene Beispiele angeführt. ; Bioethical questions have a crucial role both in people's personal choices and in the political domain. The aim of this booklet is to introduce you to the main controversies in contemporary bioethics, especially to those concerning the intersection between ethics and technology. At the end of reading the booklet, you will be equipped with the conceptual tools required to understand the main debates in ethics and technology and the most relevant positions in the debate. Hopefully, you will be also able to take your own stance on these subjects. As you see this booklet is organised around five themes: artificial intelligence, robotics, human enhancement, [genetic] engineering and environmental ethics and developments in neuroscience. Particular attention will be paid to the "controversies" over these topics, and different examples will be brought forth.

These guidelines have been designed to provide information and evidence to assist with the development, or review of the consent process for use in clinical studies with human participants. These guidelines do not deal with issues related to informed consent in clinical practice. The guidelines have been developed by the i-CONSENT consortium. i-CONSENT (H2020, Grant Agreement number 741856) is a European Union H2020 funded program that aims to improve the information that individuals receive when deciding whether or not to take part in clinical studies.