Matching Items (7)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Abortion
- All Subjects: Medical Ethics
- Creators: Brian, Jennifer
Description
Today in the U.S. the narrative of the “bad drug” has become quite a familiar account. There is an ever-growing collection of pharmaceutical products whose safety and efficacy has been debunked through the scandalous exposure of violations of integrity on the part of researchers, lapses in procedure and judgment on the part of the FDA, and reckless profiteering on the part of big pharma. However, a closer look reveals that the oversights and loopholes depicted in the bad drug narrative are not incidental failures of an otherwise intact, effective system. Rather, bad drugs, like good drugs, are a product of normal operations of the system; the same processes, actors, and influences manifest in both. The aim of this project is to shed light on these processes, actors, and influences at work in drug normalization by interrogating the peculiar case of the drug Lupron. Lupron exhibits all of the controversial features of the “bad drug” narrative but has remained an endorsed and embraced staple of the infertility industry. This contradiction situates Lupron to expose a number of the contingencies on which drug normalization rests more generally. In order to put forth an explanatory model for drug normalization, three such contingencies are described in detail for the case at hand: the nature of drug regulation, the structures and value that underpin the medical categorization of diseases, and the inextricability of post-medicine from the forces of industry. These contingencies provide some explanatory power for understanding not only the retention of Lupron but the ways in which all drugs are produced, validated, and perpetuated in a society.
ContributorsStevenson, Christine, M.S (Author) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis advisor) / Hurlbut, Benjamin (Thesis advisor) / Maienschein, Jane (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
As of 2019, 30 US states have adopted abortion-specific informed consent laws that require state health departments to develop and disseminate written informational materials to patients seeking an abortion. Abortion is the only medical procedure for which states dictate the content of informed consent counseling. State abortion counseling materials have been criticized for containing inaccurate and misleading information, but overall, informed consent laws for abortion do not often receive national attention. The objective of this project was to determine the importance of informed consent laws to achieving the larger goal of dismantling the right to abortion. I found that informed consent counseling materials in most states contain a full timeline of fetal development, along with information about the risks of abortion, the risks of childbirth, and alternatives to abortion. In addition, informed consent laws for abortion are based on model legislation called the “Women’s Right to Know Act” developed by Americans United for Life (AUL). AUL calls itself the legal architect of the pro-life movement and works to pass laws at the state level that incrementally restrict abortion access so that it gradually becomes more difficult to exercise the right to abortion established by Roe v. Wade. The “Women’s Right to Know Act” is part of a larger package of model legislation called the “Women’s Protection Project,” a cluster of laws that place restrictions on abortion providers, purportedly to protect women, but actually to decrease abortion access. “Women’s Right to Know” counseling laws do not directly deny access to abortion, but they do reinforce key ideas important to the anti-abortion movement, like the concept of fetal personhood, distrust in medical professionals, the belief that pregnant people cannot be fully autonomous individuals, and the belief that abortion is not an ordinary medical procedure and requires special government oversight. “Women’s Right to Know” laws use the language of informed consent and the purported goal of protecting women to legitimize those ideas, and in doing so, they significantly undermine the right to abortion. The threat to abortion rights posed by laws like the “Women’s Right to Know” laws indicates the need to reevaluate and strengthen our ethical defense of the right to abortion.
ContributorsVenkatraman, Richa (Author) / Maienschein, Jane (Thesis director) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis director) / Abboud, Carolina (Committee member) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
Description
Death with Dignity is a concept that initially began as a set of philosophical and ethical principles that sought to define what it meant to die a "good" death that was reasonable to the person experiencing the dying process. This dying process is terminal illness, or any condition that cannot be cured and who's ultimate prognosis is death. Today, Death with Dignity still embodies this, but it is also a set of legal and medical treatments and practices that can be used to aid terminal patients in accomplishing a "good" death. The Death with Dignity treatment options that are chiefly discussed in this study are patient withdrawal of care, patient control of pain medications, and physician-assisted suicide. Physician-assisted suicide is legal in six states in the US excluding Arizona. Considering that Oregon is the first state to pass a Death with Dignity Act and that it is the precedent for all other Acts, this study sought to understand the differences in perception of physician-assisted suicide between Arizona and Oregon in the pursuit of clarifying what barriers are still in place in Arizona to passing a Death with Dignity act. To ask the question of "Do physicians and ethics committee members in Arizona support Death with Dignity in the forms of patient control of pain medications, withdrawal of treatment, and physician-assisted suicide?", a literature review was conducted to determine important national and local perceptions of physician-assisted suicide and Death with Dignity, a 14-question, structured survey was created with the identified concerns, and it was distributed to Arizona health care workers by email and in person. This survey was approved by ASU's Institutional Review Board. This survey found that 100% of participants would vote for a Death with Dignity Act in Arizona if it were on a ballot measure. 76% of participants would aid a terminally-ill and eligible patient in physician-assisted suicide under some circumstances if it were legal in Arizona, and 24% of participants would never aid a patient in physician-assisted suicide. The concerns with physician-assisted suicide that were marked most important by Arizona healthcare workers were that hospice is a better option for the terminally ill and that physician-assisted suicide may be misused with disadvantaged persons. The most important factors of terminal illness that influence views of physician-assisted suicide marked by Arizona healthcare workers were the amount of pain the patient is expected to experience in the end of life, the amount of pain that can be relieved for the patient, the expected quality of life of the patient, and the patient's right to autonomy in healthcare. The significant differences between Oregon and Arizona in this study were the importance of expected mental decline of patient, patient's wishes that differ from family's, and hospice being a better option than suicide in influencing views of physician-assisted suicide. These differences could be deemed hurdles to Death with Dignity legislation in Arizona. This study recommended addressing those differences in public education and medical education and seeking Death with Dignity legislation via ballot measure.
ContributorsCohan, Hailey Elizabeth (Author) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis director) / Piemonte, Nicole (Committee member) / Stevenson, Christine (Committee member) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor, Contributor) / W. P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
Abortion is one of the most polarizing moral issues in our society today. This issue divides the country into two separate groups: Pro-choice or Pro-life. Our thesis analyzes published reviewed articles, media articles, policy papers, and perspective, opinion, and commentary pieces to discuss the ethical implications of selective abortion, specifically sex-selective abortion and genetic-selective abortion. Our thesis provides an overview of selective abortion, explores women’s bodily autonomy in the U.S., addresses the complexities of both sex-selective and genetic-selective abortion, and finally evaluates the U.S.’s regulation of selective abortion. Through these topics, we were able to determine the implications selective abortion has on the disabled community and how selective abortion is being used to ban abortion overall in the U.S.
ContributorsMcNeill, Ashley Rianne (Co-author) / Nguyen, Nhu (Co-author) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis director) / Manninen, Bertha (Committee member) / Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
Abortion is one of the most polarizing moral issues in our society today. This issue divides the country into two separate groups: Pro-choice or Pro-life. Our thesis analyzes published reviewed articles, media articles, policy papers, and perspective, opinion, and commentary pieces to discuss the ethical implications of selective abortion, specifically sex-selective abortion and genetic-selective abortion. Our thesis provides an overview of selective abortion, explores women’s bodily autonomy in the U.S., addresses the complexities of both sex-selective and genetic-selective abortion, and finally evaluates the U.S.’s regulation of selective abortion. Through these topics, we were able to determine the implications selective abortion has on the disabled community and how selective abortion is being used to ban abortion overall in the U.S.
ContributorsNguyen, Nhu Quynh (Co-author) / McNeill, Ashley (Co-author) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis director) / Manninen, Bertha (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor) / Watts College of Public Service & Community Solut (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
Lithium ion batteries are quintessential components of modern life. They are used to power smart devices — phones, tablets, laptops, and are rapidly becoming major elements in the automotive industry. Demand projections for lithium are skyrocketing with production struggling to keep up pace. This drive is due mostly to the rapid adoption of electric vehicles; sales of electric vehicles in 2020 are more than double what they were only a year prior. With such staggering growth it is important to understand how lithium is sourced and what that means for the environment. Will production even be capable of meeting the demand as more industries make use of this valuable element? How will the environmental impact of lithium affect growth? This thesis attempts to answer these questions as the world looks to a decade of rapid growth for lithium ion batteries.
ContributorsMelton, John (Author) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis director) / Karwat, Darshawn (Committee member) / Chemical Engineering Program (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
Informed Consent is a ubiquitous way of enshrining choice in the United States which regulates social relations in domains as varied as health, research, access to institutions, and prisons. Informed consent describes an imagined epistemic relationship between right knowledge and legitimate choice, where judgements of capacitation determine whether a person is the right sort of person to take up knowledge which will render them agential under conditions of asymmetrical power. It has been developed over and over to solve problems of injustice, where the injustice in question is understood in terms of undue infringement on individual autonomy, and the logic of informed consent is re-invented to reframe the problem at hand as a rightful matter of individual choice. It is imagined to respect autonomy, and to perform a transformative "moral magic" that makes the forbidden quotidian. This dissertation develops this account of informed consent through a series of cases, each of which explicates different aspects of the technopolitics of informed consent. It begins with genetic counseling as a paradigm case in the logic of informed consent: a well-developed field that emerged to inform people about genetics and genomics in the interest not only of individual reproductive choice, but in opposition to eugenic shaping of populations through genetic knowledge. Next, pro- and anti- abortion deployments of informed consent illustrate an epistemology of information itself, which is understood to agentialize as well as to serve as a site for refusing choice to those deemed incapacitated. Third, liability waivers and requests for student informed consent on university campuses during the pandemic show informed consent to be a tool for the exercise of biopolitics and, in particular, for making responsible subjects. Finally, civil libertarian opposition to migrant genetic testing on the grounds that migrants weren’t asked for consent demonstrates a tight coupling between consent, imaginations of just state-subject relations, and what it means to be recognized as a person. Ultimately, this dissertation argues for a practice of attention that sees informed consent as an important site for the exercise of power and offers frameworks for analyzing it as such.
ContributorsDietz, Elizabeth A (Author) / Hurlbut, Ben (Thesis advisor) / Reynolds, Joel M (Committee member) / Brian, Jennifer (Committee member) / Ellison, Karin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2023