Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics EJAIB

26Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 18 (January 2008)my view is it an instance of another inadequately structuredgovernment policy that needs amendment; it is also a taleabout NIH and its fights to guide the conflicting propensity ofscientific goals, power politics, and public ambivalence enroute for entrepreneur finances in the field of biomedicalsciences. (Here, power politics is being referred as politicalrelations and actions based on an implied threat of use ofpolitical, or economic power by a participant or agent).(3) How Damaging and Poorly Prepared Law Can BeAdjusted and Modified to Improve National Health and Well-Being.This U S Interim Final Rule, as well, reflects the leaningtendency of media to overstate issues with under-reporting ofcomplex particulars. Such a theatrical and acute change inthe policy of the U S National Health of Institute COI clearlyillustrates the complexity in harmonizing progressive sciencewith the requirements for transparency of the entire situation.It may also serve as an obvious instance of a law that is notonly damaging but also poorly prepared. It is proposed that itcan be adjusted and modified to improve national health andwelfare. In the present condition, a question may be raisedthat why similar adjustment and modification cannot beapplied to both elective abortion and fetal/embryonic tissuetransplant research, which is using ES cells.Ethical Concept as it Relates to Bioethical Decision-Making Process.(1) The Concept of Moral IntensityIn view of the aforementioned circumstances, additionally,after brief discussion in the aforementioned various issuesrelated to the current fetal tissue transplant and ES cellresearch, what we can do at present? In order to thoroughlyanswer such a question, the application of moral intensitydeserves our immediate attention.The concept of Moral Intensity, just as bioethics, is notonly a situation-particular entity, but also to be regarded as anissue-contingent replica of ethical decision-making process. Itis founded on the guesswork when the state of affairs differswith respect to the moral necessity presented in that situation.This article further explores the position of an individual’sdiscernment of situation-particular issues on decision-makingin bioethical situations. It does so by applying this concept ofmoral intensity on the bioethical decision-making process. Itevaluates the effect of moral intensity on an individual’sdiscernment of a bioethical dilemma, along with ensuingmotivations. Moral intensity (Jones, 1991) is defined as theconsideration of individual perception of ethical situations.While in the context of this article, it scopes in the bioethicalsituations.(2) The Application of Moral Intensity to Bioethical Decision-MakingKeep in the center of thoughts that, as previously beingreferred (vide infra: p. 5-6), most bioethical issues are not onlysituation–particular and issue-specific, but also can be viewedfrom different perspectives. Moral intensity proposes thatethical decisions are principally dependent on the apparentdistinctiveness of the problem in jeopardy; hence, bioethicaldecision-making entails the communal appraisal of thisuniqueness.Moral intensity is frequently employed to study ethicaldecision-making process under different circumstances(Wood, Singhapakdi 1966, Nill, Ohio, Nocera, Nussbaum,Paolillo, Roth, Schibrowsky, Yoo, and Dorantes). In brief, thistheory assumes that moral issues can be considered withregard to fundamental distinctiveness that affects the differentphases of the decision making process. It is as well noted thatmoral intensity is inherent in any ethically uncertain situation.Jones argues that moral intensity influences ethical-decision–making. He fused prior research from the business andmarketing field, along with it, the cognitive process togenerate an issue-contingent model of ethical decisionmakingthat commence the perception of moral intensity.Hence, moral intensity is distinct as the scope of issue-relatedmoral crux in a state of affairs (Wood). It is founded on thegrounds that the motivation, purpose and resulting behaviorstemmed from a person's insight of whether a collection ofethical mechanisms presents in an understandable anddiscernable environment, and to what degree and level.Those studies also indicate that relativism negatively affectsone's insight of moral intensity (Arrington, and Douglas).Conversely, a personal decision is directed by one'sappraisal of six dissimilar components that cooperativelycomprise moral intensity of the state of affairs. Suchmechanisms include 1) magnitude of consequences - theaggregate harm or benefits of the act; 2) probability of effect -the likelihood that the act will cause harm or benefits; 3)temporal immediacy – the length of time between the act andits consequences; 4) concentration of effect – the number ofpeople affected by the act; 5) proximity – the social distancebetween the decision maker and those affected by the act;and 6) social consensus – the degree to which others thinkthe act is good or evil (Jones). There is certainly an influenceof moral intensity on both ethical intuition and behavioralintents, in a context of the business and marketing.(Singhapakdi, 1966). The more these components that arepresent, the more likely it is that an individual will recognizethe existence of an ethical problem, with a subsequent effecton judgment, intentions, and behavior (Jones and Douglas).Experimental studies in the sector of business have alreadyindicated that moral intensity affects perception of ethicalissues in general (Jones, Wood, Singhapakdi 1966, Nill, Ohio,Nocera, Nussbaum, Paolillo, Roth, Schibrowsky, Yoo, andDorantes). In parallel, clinical and life science researchers, aspreviously indicated, have acknowledged an abundance ofethical theory to bear on the moral responsibility of their ownresearch. Hence, after presenting the necessity of soundunderstanding in moral intensity, this author is proposing amodel, with the hope that such a model will shed light onembryonic/fetal tissue transplantation and stem cell research.This proposed model indeed requires the addition of theprinciples of transparence and sensitivity to social and culturalsignificance when one is considering the use of humanbiological tissue in research endeavors, especially, on the useof fetal and embryonic tissues for stem cell research. Such amoral stance is in accord with community accountability anddependability. The aim of this model is to guide the bioethicaldecision-making process.The Model of Bioethical Decision-Making ProcessAn individual’s combined evaluation based on these sixcomponents of the characteristics results in a given situation’smoral intensity. This affects the individual’s moral judgment,intentions, and ensuring decision-making. Basically, problemswith high moral intensity will be identified as ethical dilemmasmore frequent than those with low moral intensity, guiding theway to a positive relationship between moral intensity andreorganization of ethical problems. Additionally, problems withhigh moral intensity bear a positive relationship with aperson’s intention (motivation) to conduct in an ethicalapproach. Of importance in this context of bioethics is the factthat this model does require the participation of personalmoral philosophy, and that of principle of transparency andsensitivity to the human biological tissues. To elaborate, inaccord with existing ethical theories (Singhapakdi et al., 1996;Singhapakdi et al., 1999), two additional relationships areadded. One is sensitivity to sociocultural significance of thehuman biological tissue has a positive relationship towardsreorganization of bioethical problems. The other is theprinciple of transparency existing between each pair ofrelationships except one, which is the relationship betweenmoral intensity and relativism. It is a negative relationship. Allthe aforementioned is indicated in the proposed model in thefigure.