Download the full 
August 2017 EACME Newsletter
Contents
Editorial G. Birchley
Clinical Ethics Consultation in a Swiss Pyschiatric Universtiy Hospital: Multiplicity and Diversity Research Fellowship in Clinical Ethics Basel B. Mitzscherlich
Justice, Vulnerability and Developing a Malaria Vaccine M. van den Berg
Top four ethical issues in the Healthcare system in Romania M. Aluas
Le travail d’une Commission nationale d’éthique J. Martin
Nursing Ethics Course in KU Leuven. A personal view M. Aluas
‘Reification’ and assent. Report on a Workshop Held at the University of Oslo, July 4th 2017 G. Birchley
Why I (We) wrote the Ethical Judgments Collection S.W. Smith
Book reviews
A Guide to Psychosocial and Spiritual Care at the end of Life – H. S. Perkins, F. Nicoli
Le long cheminement en France de la réflexion sur la fin de la vie. V. Fournier La mort est-elle un droit? J. Martin
Announcement / New books 13
Editorial Board
Editorial
Dear EACME colleagues and friends,
The recent legal case of a child whose parents sought innovative treatment for his serious genetic disorder, Charlie Gard, has meant that medical ethics led the news in the United Kingdom for a number of weeks.1 Owing to interventions from public figures internationally, these debates, like those centred on Eluana Englaro and Terri Schiavo in the past, have been aired in the international media. As the courts deliberated, the media reports have been accompanied by a widespread public engagement through the internet and social media, as well as mobilisations of interested groups who hoped to influence decision-makers. While some of these interventions were reasoned and thoughtful, much intervention was passionate. Indeed, professionals at the treating hospital were subject to threats of violence and worse. At the same time, the media were hungry for the views of bioethicists and scientists and many in the U.K. were approached to speak, write or debate. Many were in a quandary – was it disrespectful to express a view on a private matter whose facts were not fully known? Or instead, were the moral issues so urgent and important that we had a duty to contribute despite our ignorance? Equally, there were personal dilemmas – did we as individuals want to publicly express views on a matter when public feeling ran so high? So, we all had a chance to think hard about exactly what it meant to be medical ethicists.
The case and its developments touched on central debates within bioethics: At what stage does an experimental treatment become research? Should deciding for children be left to professionals or should families be empowered? Should medical ethics be about democracy and the views of the public, or does this invite serious moral misjudgements? These are important issues and touch upon many of the themes of the upcoming 2017 EACME conference in Barcelona, which is centred upon “Justice in Health Care – Values in Conflict”. In this issue of the newsletter we carry a short paper on this theme, discussing the value conflicts raised by attempting to ensure justice while protecting vulnerability. It make interesting reading and I am grateful to the contributor for sharing such fine work with us. Other pieces in this newsletter showcase the diversity of ethical debate in other areas, such as the place of spirituality in end of life treatment, the work of national ethics committees and the intersection of the law and medical ethics. I hope then, that this newsletter can whet your appetite for discussion of these important issues, and look forward to meeting some of you in Barcelona to do just that.
Dr Giles Birchley
Centre for Ethics in Medicine, University of Bristol, U.K.
Download the full August 2017 EACME Newsletter
