50 mesures pour une nouvelle France : de lhumanisme au libéralisme (French Edition)

Specific topics

---

Houzeau de Lahaie, commence ainsi: Ainsi, Sophie Lorrain explique: Les partis bourgeois restent toutefois absents: En refusant d'entrer dans le jeu politique, les pacifistes s'isolent volontairement. Deux attitudes se dessinent: De nombreux membres du Verband soutiennent eux aussi la guerre comme un devoir national [ ] et moral. Sur le plan international, la situation est difficile. Deux mouvances se dessinent alors au sein du mouvement pacifiste allemand. Ils doivent donc adopter deux positions: Les relations internationales sont avant tout les relations entre la France et l' Allemagne.

Exclue du concert des nations, l'Allemagne veut retrouver sa place et le mouvement pacifiste allemand plaide en ce sens. Ces derniers essaient de gagner les institutions. Il publie son Handbuch der Friedensbewegung en deux volumes en et Occupation de la Ruhr.

Organisation, Ideologie, politische Ziele: Gesichtspunkte zur deutschen Selbsterkenntnis und zum Aufbau eines neuen Deutschland , Stuttgart, , p. Michael Kotulla, Deutsches Verfassungsrecht Collection Individu et Nation en ligne , Vol. Dokumente zur Friedensbewegung , Fischer Taschenbuch, , p. Thomas Paul Socknat, Challenge to Mars: In France, where the ongoing struggle is between the technical and political communities, the credibility of a commission's conclusions lies in their persuasiveness within the research community.

Political advocacy

French physicians, who unlike their American counterparts have little financial stake in proffering novel technologies, tend to have interests aligned with the research community, i. It is no accident, therefore, that the new director of the French commission is a leading French scientist, or that the commission's "public hearings" consisted of prepared statements by 17 luminaries and prepared questions by a number of leading theologians and intellectuals.

In the United States, where the debate is somewhat less about limiting the freedom of researchers and somewhat more about limiting the freedom of potential patients service consumers or physicians service retailers , the credibility of commissions lies in their persuasiveness within the lay and medical communities. This in turn would seem to argue for commission leadership that is political rather than technical, and for hearings that are open to the general public. It also means that a commission's work will be far more subject to the vagaries of the general public's political sensibilities on issues such as abortion or the role of religious teachings in public policy.

Fetal research has led to a vaccine for polio, to improved treatments for diseases of both fetus and expectant mother, and now, through transplantation, to prospects for curing Parkinson's disease and juvenile diabetes. Perhaps most important, it has helped develop basic understanding of cell biology, particularly of cancer cells. In the words of R. Levine, "Even this incomplete list should serve to demonstrate the enormous value of fetal research.

But the American experience with reviewing the use of fetal tissue in research and transplantation, while seemingly raising lofty questions of morality, has in fact been mired in far more sticky political problems. Indeed, the effort to ground the process in serious epidemiology discussing cause-and-effect would permitting research increase the number of abortions? The Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, passed by all 50 states and the District of Columbia between and , authorizes donation of "all or part of the body" of an aborted fetus for research or therapeutic purposes.

But individual states also can regulate or restrict fetal tissue donation, and the 25 state laws on the subject contain vague and sometimes conflicting provisions. Some of the state laws do not even define what a fetus is or what constitutes fetal research. For example, Arizona bans the use of "any human fetus or embryo" in nontherapeutic research. California bans nontherapeutic research upon the "product of conception," Illinois upon a "fetus," Oklahoma and Pennsylvania upon the "unborn child.

The first major flap at the federal level over fetal research occurred in the s, when reports surfaced of experiments on live aborted fetuses. Meanwhile, a moratorium was imposed halting all research "on a living human fetus, before or after the induced abortion of such fetus, unless such research is done for the purposes of assuring the survival of such fetus.

In , the National Commission issued its report Research on the Fetus, 20 in which it outlined proposed limitations on research with dead fetuses and fetal tissue. These proposals, eventually adopted and codified 21 by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, followed the National Commission's unanimous proposal that "use of the dead fetus, fetal tissue, and fetal material for research purposes be permitted, consistent with local law, the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act and commonly held convictions about respect for the dead.

By the mids, promising research in Sweden and Mexico on the use of fetal tissue transplantation for the treatment of Parkinson's disease made this form of research far more visible than it had been. By the same time, anti-abortion forces had expanded the scope of their efforts to include a number of collateral issues, including the development of new abortifacients; use of alcohol and other drugs among pregnant women; regulation of in vitro fertilization; and mandatory contraception for female child abusers.

On March 22, , the Reagan administration rejected a request from the National Institutes of Health for permission to transplant fetal tissue into the brain of a patient with severe Parkinson's disease, and imposed a moratorium on all research using tissue from aborted fetuses. The guidance he received consisted of a letter from Windom, directing Wyngaarden to convene an outside advisory panel to look at the ethics of fetal tissue transplantation, and listing specific questions to be answered.

An ad hoc selection committee deliberately chose a politically acceptable chair, Arlin Adams.

Known as a conservative opponent of abortion, Adams nonetheless took seriously the appearance of impartiality flowing from his position as a federal judge. A prominent physician Kenneth Ryan , ethicist Leroy Walters , and abortion opponent James Bopp were added to the roster to round out appearances and leadership, and an additional 17 panel members were selected by NIH's internal ad hoc committee.

On September 9, , during the week before the NIH panel opened its hearing, a draft executive order from President Reagan banning all fetal tissue research was disclosed. The order appeared to have been drafted and circulated by White House domestic policy adviser Gary Bauer.

Society's Choices: Social and Ethical Decision Making in Biomedicine.

According to a published news account, "Some committee members expressed dismay that the White House would draft such an order before the NIH advisory panel had a chance to hear a word of testimony, but spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said the draft did not represent the official White House position. Nonethless, on September , , the NIH special advisory panel held three days of hearings on fetal tissue research.

FETAL TISSUE RESEARCH: THE U.S. EXPERIENCE

While most speakers urged the panel to consider the scientific value and ethical acceptability of fetal tissue research apart from controversy over abortion, the abortion issue quickly dominated the debate. At the conclusion of the hearings, the panel voted 19 to 0, with two abstentions, that use of tissue from legally aborted fetuses for medical research and treatment is "acceptable.

Indeed, Kenneth Ryan, the NIH panel's scientific chairman, said the committee would try to ''steer a conciliatory, practical approach to policy" on fetal tissue research, despite the volatility of the abortion issue. The panel attempted, within severe time constraints and the subject matter limitations of Windom's charge to the committee, to arrive at a consensus concerning the principles and values that ought to guide fetal research.

Those included 1 the moral status of the fetus and of abortion; 2 the possibility that deriving good from abortion is an example of complicity in evil; 3 the possibility that deriving good from abortion would increase the number of abortions i. The attack on fetal research was grounded partly on the idea of complicity: Worse, a woman might choose to get pregnant merely to produce research material; perhaps she could sell her fetus or give it to a relative who has diabetes.

Fetal research was also denounced as being unethical because the subject cannot give informed consent and no one appears to have the standing to give proxy consent-surely a mother who has chosen to end the life of her "unborn child" cannot be relied on to guard its interests. Underlying all these discussions, but particularly those concerning the moral status of the fetus, was a tension between the value of fetal life and the value of adult life that might be helped by the use of the tissue. In other words, the conflict was not one between science for the sake of science versus the potentially immoral effects of yielding to the technological imperative.

Rather, it was a more pragmatic balancing of the benefits of applied science for one group of people Parkinson's patients against the disadvantages to another group fetuses and their defenders. And as neither group of persons could claim moral primacy based on biology alone, 32 the fetuses won moral primacy based upon their symbolic value and the political efforts of the well-organized anti-abortion movement. In the end, therefore, despite efforts to reach a consensus by accepting for the sake of argument the evil nature of abortion and then working forward to whether this prohibits some good from emerging from its practice, the panel failed.

Dissenting opinions were written, and the vote of the panel to lift the moratorium was ignored. During the subsequent Bush administration, secretary of health and human services Louis Sullivan rejected the panel's report on the dubious excuse that he was not convinced by the epidemiological evidence that abortion frequency would remain unchanged should fetal tissue donation be permitted.

But the fundamental dynamic at play concerned appearances, not fine analytical reasoning. As suggested by panel member Rabbi David Bleich, "federal funding conveys an unintended message of moral approval for every aspect of the research program. Rather, the issue was one of pure politics and appearances. To the extent that fetal tissue research offended the sensibilities of abortion opponents, it could legitimately be discouraged. Efforts by panel members such as John Robertson or Leroy Walters to analyze why social legitimation of abortion does not follow from use of fetal tissue just as social legitimation of homicide or drunk driving does not follow from use of cadaveric tissue were futile because they were directed at the merits rather than the emotional content of the social legitimation argument.

By November , newspapers were reporting that the scientific community had reached an impasse with the administration and its willingness to let political concerns over the abortion issue block promising research and promising therapies. Frustration has been building among medical researchers for the last year, according to several interviewed this week. They said the seemingly irreconcilable split over abortion has created a climate in which one bioethical issue after another has become politically too hot to handle-or even discuss.

Concern rose to a new pitch last week when the secretary of health and human services, Louis W. Sullivan, extended a ban on research using transplants of tissue from aborted fetuses. Sullivan ignored the advice of a special federal panel that had concluded that the research could help millions of afflicted people and would not increase the number of abortions. The failure of the federal commission to reach an effective consensus led to a series of private efforts by medical societies, whose members specialized in therapies hampered by the absence of good fetal research, to rally public support through self-regulation of fetal tissue research.

For example, a report titled "Medical Applications of Fetal Tissue Transplants" was issued by the American Medical Association in June , calling for the use of fetal tissue grafts. Under guidelines approved by the AMA panel, the use of fetal tissue for transplantation was considered ethically permissible when it is not provided for profit and when the recipient is not designated by the donor. A woman's decision to have an abortion should be made before any discussion of the transplantation use of the fetal tissue is initiated, according to the report, and doctors who participate in the abortion should not receive any benefit from the transplantation of the tissue.

I also oppose it to the extent that it will be a tiny elite clique deciding fundamental ethical issues, such as when we can treat human beings like laboratory animals. We are moving by conscious inaction. There is abortion gridlock, and in the Government there is also just plain fear of any issue pertaining to reproduction.

The federal government, faced with this revolt by patient-consumers and their provider-advocates, stepped in again in the form of congressional action, when legislation was introduced in to overturn the fetal tissue ban as part of an overall NIH funding bill. The bill passed with substantial majorities in both houses of Congress, prompting a wave of public advertisements 37 and public statements 38 on both sides of the issue, directed at President Bush and his veto power. In June , however, as expected, President Bush vetoed legislation that would have overturned a federal ban on fetal tissue research, saying that such work is "inconsistent with our nation's deeply held beliefs" and that many Americans find it "morally repugnant.

Interestingly enough, the U. Canadian concerns about fetal tissue research centered not on its effect on the frequency or morality of abortion, but rather on commercialization of this and other forms of organ donation. Its mandate directs it to examine medical and scientific developments around new reproductive technologies, in particular their social, ethical, health, research, legal, and economic implications, and their impact on women, children, and society as a whole.

The Commission has established a multifaceted Consultations program to enable it to hear the views and opinions of people from all sectors of Canadian society. It has also set in motion a comprehensive and multidisciplinary program of research and evaluation to provide rigorous, credible, and timely information about, and critical analysis of, the issues surrounding new reproductive technologies.

In response to requests from academics and policymakers for raw data and underlying analysis, the Royal Commission began releasing copies of its working papers to the public. A Research Architecture," 42 examines the decades-long use of human fetal tissue by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to develop vaccines and to test the efficacy of new pharmaceutical products. It notes that it has more recently been a critical tool in viral research on infections such as human influenza, hepatitis B, measles, and human immunodeficiency virus HIV.

The paper concludes that, while the scope of application for human embryo and fetal tissue research is increasing, there is a lack of public policy to address the social, ethical, legal, and regulatory issues their use raises. This study, entitled "Sciences de la vie: From Ethics to Law" , was submitted to the government and to the public in early , and listed more than specific measures that could be taken by executive or parliamentary action to bring French law into conformity with the advisory opinions of the CCNE.

The Braibant report is notable for its attempt to propose an enormous number of legal changes consistent with a few thematic conclusions of the CCNE. These included the indivisibility of body and soul, and the resulting importance of bodily integrity and the noncommercialization of body parts, 44 principles endorsed by the Ministry of Justice:. It's the inalienability of the body that makes it wrong both to touch my body without my consent or to make my body the object of patrimony or commercialization: A later prime minister, Michel Rocard, extended this work by requesting that the Braibant report be transformed into discrete pieces of draft legislation.

Thus, beginning in early , a drafting effort was led by Claude Evin, health minister, and Pierre Arpaillage, minister of justice. Rocard hoped to present amendments to the civil code and the public health code by the spring of that year, in time to coincide with the bicentennial celebrations. But that was not to be:. Michel Rocard's preferred schedule was ignored from the beginning, and thus began the hesitation waltz that would last for three long years.

Voices quickly were raised to protest the Braibant proposals, in more or less radical fashion and to denounce all precipitous action The need for a bioethics law fed an intense cacophony in the government at this time. By the end of ,. All eyes looked to Mitterrand to unblock the legislative path toward a bioethics law.

Menu de navigation

Further movement would await the efforts of deputy minister of justice Michel Sapin, who called in September for a declaration of the "rights of the biological being" and an embodiment in the civil code of a legally defined status for the human body. By March , Sapin had persuaded the Council of Ministers to adopt three draft law projects, which then were sent to the National Assembly, with health minister Kouchner as their proponent.

Thus, by March , the French cabinet had adopted a biomedical code of ethics to prevent the alteration of genes, a trade in organs, surrogate motherhood, or the use of artificial insemination except for women who are sterile or whose husbands have genetic diseases. It would also outlaw payment for donated blood or organs, and keep all donors anonymous. It would ban the use of any part of a person's body without prior consent.

The French code proposal followed years of heated debate over whether to limit innovative scientific techniques. Critics feared such innovations could lead to nightmarish experiments; others argued that scientific progress must not be impeded. It took eight months for the cabinet's adoption of the code to be accepted by the National Assembly. As Mitterrand stated in April Besides, the principle of respect for persons has universal appeal, so despite some differences in ideas or sensitivities.

As in the United States, some of the resistance to implementing Mitterrand's vision lay in the politics of the abortion movement. For example, there was the pressure of researchers fighting anti-abortionists over the issue of sanctity of research versus embryonic life, and general fear that unforeseeable consequences of the new technologies would outstrip legislative, religious, and philosophical efforts. In its local incarnation, the movement focused mostly on clinic services, but it did register opposition to the bioethics law project as well, using the public hearings as an occasion on which to attack the underlying law concerning abortion.

And the National Assembly debates did feature some very forceful antiabortion rhetoric. For example, the appointment of member Yvette Roudy as the chair of the assembly's ad hoc committee to examine the law proposals Bioulac was its rapporteur drew a blistering response by conservative member Christine Boutin, who charged that the appointment was an "open provocation," as Roudy was known to be a woman "leading the struggle against the defense of the embryo, and therefore against life. On the other hand, another commentator characterized the procedure by which the CCNE opinions became legislative proposals as one that "does honor to French democracy.

And indeed the politicians did take advantage of their opportunity to reflect upon the subject. Instead, a number of amendments were made to the proposed law project, including: But most interesting, perhaps, are the amendments that sought to reinforce the CCNE's original position that reproductive technologies are to be used for "medical" purposes only. These would be strictly limited to the prevention or treatment of "an affliction of particular gravity, and in the interest of the child to be born". In an article reflecting upon the ten years of the CCNE's work, one commentator suggested that the fundamental dilemma posed by new reproductive technologies, and indeed, most new medical technologies, was one of competing claims to power by the medical and political communities:.

Ten years after the creation of the national bioethics commission, the following question still remains: If they do so, they become mere retailers of services; if they do not, they become sole judges. Therefore, it is urgent that we create social regulations that do not depend only upon physicians' own conceptions, but also upon the fact that society is made of humanity. Medicine is a human affair, treated on a case-by-case basis, but within a framework that spells out which things are legal and which are not e.

With the prenatal diagnosis amendments, the National Assembly reinforced the notion that these technologies ought to be developed within the boundaries of a "superior morality" that governs the potential consumer class. Physicians are appointed to enforce that morality by virtue of their role as interpreters of the law. This sort of power sharing among elite classes-the political elite and the technical elite-is one reason for the effectiveness of the consensus development on bioethics issues that has taken place in France since It creates a unified front against which religious leaders, feminists, leftist and rightist radicals, or any other marginalized group must struggle.

One of France's leading researchers, Jacques Testart, has written about the various possible formulations for a commission reviewing genetic planning. Interestingly, he concludes that no commission will be able to resist the power of researchers and physicians, because it is they who will give meaning to the terms "infertility" or "grave genetic malformation. But the most recent political dam was created more by the vagaries of the legislative session than by any substantive concern over the proposed laws themselves. Despite anti-abortion action during the National Assembly debates, for example, the legislation was passed with a large majority reflecting a broad coalition encompassing all but the extreme right and left ends of the political spectrum.

One commentator feared that any further delay in Senate action to translate policy into law would subject France to another series of "media coups" that awaken patient demands based on outlandish examples of reproductive technology, such as "insemination of young virgins, pregnancy after menopause, or gender selection, which stir up people's fancies for three or four days-the time for which the media hopes to temporarily increase its sales or audience share-and leave physicians to face the resulting requests for services.

The role of the legislator is so sensitive that the rapidity of scientific progress and the evolution of social mores can render obsolete a piece of legislation that has just been passed.

Histoire du mouvement pacifiste allemand jusqu'en 1945

The Senate adopted the CCNE proposal in January to have its recommendations definitively made into law, the CCNE itself is hoping to enlarge its scope of activities beyond consideration of medical research to all aspects of medical practice. This is largely in reaction to Mitterrand's call for its greater involvement in the question of AIDS policy and the CCNE's own three efforts to shape public screening proposals.

But the CCNE has already been expanding its activities even within its current advisory, executive branch, research-oriented structure, and the pace at which it issues its opinions has quickened since Senate passage of the legislation discussed above would authorize the CCNE by statute and its opinions legal force subject to review each five years for their conformity with technical, political, and philosophical developments.

While its continued existence was not in doubt, its membership and mission were subject to change. Some commentators continued to deplore the presence of researchers on the commission, asserting that they are unable to act in a disinterested manner, and called instead for a commission made up entirely of philosophers and theologians.

• Letters from the Great Depression: Glimpses of Life in the 1930s
• Heldendichtung - Eine Gattung?: Die Abgrenzung der Gattung „Heldendichtung“ ein bekanntes Problem in der Literaturwissenschaft (German Edition)
• Luso sapiente delle buone maniere: Un caso per Isabel Dalhousie, filosofa e investigatrice (Italian Edition)
• Stanley the Sock Monkey - Adventures by the Sea Childrens Comic Book
• BLACKMAILED (Blacked in Barbados Book 2)
• A Tengu’s Feathered Fan (OTO-EHON Japanese Folk Tales - English ver. Book 2)
• Julios First Day of School (I am a STAR Personalized Book Series 1)