O poder e as injustiças nas pesquisas em seres humanos

Após considerações gerais sobre a ética na pesquisa envolvendo seres humanos, focaliza-se a possibilidade de ocorrências de injustiças, sob a égide de diversas formas de poder. Exemplificam-se situações concretas. Enfatiza-se a análise das possíveis injustiças à luz da Bioética, com destaque para multi e transdisciplinaridade. O autor se posiciona quanto às características atuais da Bioética, cuja ótica levou à elaboração das Diretrizes éticas para a pesquisa envolvendo seres humanos, no Brasil (Resolução 196/96 e complementares do Conselho Nacional de Saúde). Descreve-se a sistemática das atividades do Grupo Executivo de Trabalho - GET, designado pelo Conselho Nacional de Saúde (órgão de controle social na área da saúde), para elaborar as Diretrizes. É dado destaque à participação dos diversos segmentos da sociedade, evidenciando multi e transdiciplinaridade, sob a coordenação do GET, do qual o autor foi Presidente. Comentam-se os principais tópicos das Diretrizes brasileiras, enfocando-se a sua relação com o tema de poder e injustiça. Salienta-se o papel dos Comitês de Ética em Pesquisa - CEP e da Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa - CONEP.

Panorama atual da ética em pesquisa em seres humanos

In the last decades, medical care has been increasingly permeated by the concept of evidence-based-medicine, in which clinical research plays a crucial role in establishing diagnostic and treatment. Following the improvements in clinical research, we have a growing concern and understanding that some ethical issues must be respected when the subjects are human beings. Research with human subjects relies on the principles of autonomy, beneficence, no maleficence and justice. Ordinance 196/96 from the National Health Board adds to the Brazilian legislation such renowned bioethical principles.Aim: Discuss the main ethical aspects involved in research with human subjects.Materials and Methods: Critical analysis of Ordinance 196/96 and related literature.Conclusion: Ordinance 196/96 rules research with human subjects; nevertheless, it requires more in-depth discussions regarding the informed consent, use of placebo, research with vulnerable populations and research in developing countries.

Reinventing development: utopias devised by committees and seeds of change in the real world

Includes bibliography

The behavior of brazilian senators: analyzing the exchange of votes inside the fixed committees during the 52nd legislature

Using the method of Social Networks Analysis, we’ll try to see if politicians swap votes between them seeking support for their projects, to this end, we’ll first map the behavior, activities and contacts of the Senators of the Brazilian Federative Republic within all the fixed committees which had some vote during the 52nd Legislature, then we can see the most popular and central Senators to each committee. After this analysis we wish to answer the following question: did logrolling exist in the Brazilian Senate? Previously the empirical analysis and response to the problems posed, we’ll present the necessary theoretical introduction understood by reviewing the literature on relevant subjects, whether they are purely theoretical with respect to the exchange of support, or analytical about the Brazilian political system.

A TRAINING COURSE ON BIOETHICS FOR FAMILY HEALTH STRATEGY PROFESSIONALS IN SANTO ANDRE, SP

This case report presents the experience of a training course on bioethics for nurses and physicians of the Family Health Strategy in Santo Andre, SP. This study is based on problem-based learning and deliberative bioethics, and aimed at presenting the deliberation procedure as a means of handling ethical issues. Contents were addressed in a cross-section manner through five sequential activity sessions at two different moments of concentration with one dispersion interval. In the first moment of concentration, key concepts and deliberative bioethics contents were developed. The second involved deliberation sessions on moral conflicts, which were selected and prepared during the dispersion interval. Participants evaluated the deliberation as an appropriate instrument to deal with the ethical issues they are faced with. Problem-based learning was an effective educational strategy for continuing education in deliberative bioethics.

Bioethics and medical/legal considerations on cochlear implants in children

Cochlear implants are the best treatment for congenital profound deafness. Pediatric candidates to implantation are seen as vulnerable citizens, and the decision of implanting cochlear devices is ultimately in the hands of their parents/guardians. The Brazilian Penal Code dictates that deaf people may enjoy diminished criminal capacity. Many are the bioethical controversies around cochlear implants, as representatives from the deaf community have seen in them a means of decimating their culture and intrinsic values. Objective: This paper aims to discuss, in bioethical terms, the validity of implanting cochlear hearing aids in children by analyzing their vulnerability and the social/cultural implications of the procedure itself, aside from looking into the medical/legal aspects connected to their criminal capacity. Materials and Methods: The topic was searched on databases Medline and Lilacs; ethical analysis was done based on principialist bioethics. Results: Cochlear implants are the best therapeutic option for people with profound deafness and are morally justified. The level of criminal capacity attributed to deaf people requires careful analysis of the subject's degree of understanding and determination when carrying out the acts for which he/she has been charged. Conclusion: Cochlear implants are morally valid. Implantations must be analyzed on an each case basis. ENT physicians bear the ethical responsibility for indicating cochlear implants and must properly inform the child's parents/guardians and get their written consent before performing the procedure.

Bioethics and Mental Health: The Rights of Patients With a Disorder

Bioethics can be included in the context of psychiatric patients' recovery of dignity and rights, creating a therapeutic interface of social rehabilitation, respect and closeness between professionals and the treated persons. The completion of the analysis of the facts occurred by reviewing 22 articles dated between 1999-2011, from a prior reading, selecting the ones that mention bioethics and mental health. Before the Psychiatric Reform, often, a lack of commitment to the mentally ill was noticed, isolating the patient from a social life. Before the Psychiatric Reform, often, a lack of commitment to the mentally ill was noticed by isolating the patient from a social life. After the Reform, the person with mental illness began to receive a more attentive care. It can be concluded that the Reform tried to bring life to those who had no respect and attention, these patients who needed to be included in a social and urban interaction.

La nutrizione-idratazione artificiale è terapia? All'interfaccia tra scienza, diritto e bioetica, il fine vita in Italia, secondo una prospettiva di comunicazione della scienza post-accademica e Science&Technologies Studies (STS)

The question “artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) is therapy or not?” is one of the key point of end-of-life issues in Italy, since it was (and it is also nowadays) a strategic and crucial point of the Italian Bioethics discussion about the last phases of human life: determining if ANH is therapy implies the possibility of being included in the list of treatments that could be mentioned for refusal within the living will document. But who is entitled to decide and judge if ANH is a therapy or not? Scientists? The Legislator? Judges? Patients? This issue at first sight seems just a matter of science, but at stake there is more than a scientific definition. According to several scholars, we are in the era of post-academic Science, in which Science broaden discussion, production, negotation and decision to other social groups that are not just the scientific communities. In this process, called co-production, on one hand scientific knowledge derives from the interaction between scientists and society at large. On the other hand, science is functional to co-production of social order. The continuous negotation on which science has to be used in social decisions is just the evidence of the mirroring negotation for different way to structure and interpret society. Thus, in the interaction between Science and Law, deciding what kind of Science could be suitable for a specific kind of Law, envisages a well defined idea of society behind this choice. I have analysed both the legislative path (still in progress) in the living will act production in Italy and Eluana Englaro’s judicial case (that somehow collapsed in the living will act negotiation), using official documents (hearings, texts of the official conference, committees comments and ruling texts) and interviewing key actors in the two processes from the science communication point of view (who talks in the name of science? Who defines what is a therapy? And how do they do?), finding support on the theoretical framework of the Science&Technologies Studies (S&TS).