El Papa ha apoyado hoy la recogida de firmas en Italia para la iniciativa unos de nosotros que pretende adaptar la legislación comunitaria a la protección del embrión tras la sentencia Brüstle.
Aqui esta el link para la firma de los ciudadanos españoles. Se requiere un número de firmas mínimo por país.
https://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/ECI-2012-000005/public/signup.do?lang=es
domingo, 12 de mayo de 2013
sábado, 11 de mayo de 2013
Link nueva traducción de un texto de Nicolás Gómez Dávila al italiano.
Para celebrar el centenario se adelantan los italianos:
http://www.liminamentis.com/scheda-libro/gomez-davila-nicolas/alle-origini-del-mondo-9788895881997-132482.html
http://www.liminamentis.com/scheda-libro/gomez-davila-nicolas/alle-origini-del-mondo-9788895881997-132482.html
viernes, 10 de mayo de 2013
Dossier de Prensa cuidados paliativos mes de mayo
Pongo el enlace al dossier de Prensa sobre noticias de cuidados paliativos que ha realizado el centro Laguna- Vianorte.
http://issuu.com/vianortelaguna/docs/dossier_publicaciones_sobre_cuidados_paliativos_me?mode=embed&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Flight%2Flayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true
http://issuu.com/vianortelaguna/docs/dossier_publicaciones_sobre_cuidados_paliativos_me?mode=embed&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Flight%2Flayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true
miércoles, 8 de mayo de 2013
Ha fallecido Pablo Gil-Loyzaga
Ha fallecido Pablo Gil-Loyzaga Catedrático de la Facultad de Medicina, presidente del capítulo de bioética de la Orden de Malta y amigo ejemplar.
Aquí en la última reunión que tuvimos en Octubre en la Universidad San Pablo.
Aquí en la última reunión que tuvimos en Octubre en la Universidad San Pablo.
martes, 7 de mayo de 2013
.jpg)
Comité de bioética de España. Amendments and suggestions to the Draft guide concerning the decision-making process regarding medical treatment in end-of-life situations. DH-Bio/Inf (2013) 1.
Terminado el plazo de enmiendas el Comité de Bioética de España ha enviado las siguientes observaciones al Draft guide concerning the decision-making process regarding medical treatment in end-of-life situations. DH-Bio/Inf 2013 1.
Las ideas fundamentales son:
Apoyo al sentido general del documento, especialmente a la necesidad de adaptar las legislaciones y la formación médica para hacer frente a los retos que plantea la toma de decisiones en la atención médica en las fases finales de la vida.
Como posibles mejoras se proponen, entre otras, las siguientes: adaptar la definición de dignidad humana de forma que se precise como dignidad de todo "ser humano".
Considerar que en la situación de crisis económica el único riesgo no es la aplicación de medidas fútiles en los tratamientos al final de la vida sino también el abandono terapeútico.
Sustituir el termino limitation por appropiate en lo referente a la adecuación del tratamiento al final de la vida. Insistir en el estudio de la forma en que pacientes, personal sanitario y familiares se aproximan a las cuestiones referentes a la retirada de tratamientos.
Considerar que la aplicación de determinados tratamientos debe vincularse a la lex artis y que desde el punto de vista de al autonomía no es lo mismo la capacidad de rechazo a un tratamiento que el supuesto derecho a exigir un tratamiento contraindicado.
Dar la debida importancia a los deseos del paciente anotados en la historia clínica, puesta en contexto de los deseos expresados en las voluntades anticipadas.
También recomendar la celebración de "family meetings" en consonancia con lo indicado por diversas Organizaciones científicas de nivel europeo.
Amendments and suggestions
to the Draft guide concerning the decision-making process regarding medical
treatment in end-of-life situations. DH-Bio/Inf (2013) 1.
The Bioethics Committee of Spain agrees with the
need and opportunity of the working
document "Draft guide
concerning the decision-making
process regarding medical treatment in
end-of-life situations". The
content and the proposals expressed
in the document are welcomed. The Committee considers it to be necessary to adapt the laws
of the Council of Europe member
countries to the challenges that face the decision-making process regarding medical
treatments in end of life situations.
Notwithstanding the above, we propose the following
contributions to the text:
1. Replacement amendment
Introduction Page 3, n 3: We propose to substitute “The protection of human dignity and human beings” as it is written in the document for “The protection of human beings and their dignity”.
Justification: We think it is more appropriate to refer to "the protection of human beings and their dignity" because the protection of the being and dignity of individuals acquires larger and concrete qualified implications than just to refer to the protection of somehow an abstract value as that of human dignity. The proposal would be in line with the Resolution 1859 (2012) of the Parliamentary Assembly, Item 4 final "Protect their human rights and dignity".
Introduction Page 3, n 3: We propose to substitute “The protection of human dignity and human beings” as it is written in the document for “The protection of human beings and their dignity”.
Justification: We think it is more appropriate to refer to "the protection of human beings and their dignity" because the protection of the being and dignity of individuals acquires larger and concrete qualified implications than just to refer to the protection of somehow an abstract value as that of human dignity. The proposal would be in line with the Resolution 1859 (2012) of the Parliamentary Assembly, Item 4 final "Protect their human rights and dignity".
2. Addition Amendment
Page 4 n 10 bis: In the context of an economic crisis like the one we are in and its likely impact in a medium and long term, end of life ethical issues should not only be restricted to the consideration of the risk of adopting therapeutic futile measures. The opposite attitude should also be addressed concerning the lack in some cases of an implementation and limitation of therapeutic measures.
Justification: The introduction of the new text will prevent certain unilateralism in considering that the only risk that the patient and the medical team have concerns exclusively the therapeutic futility or non futility of the measures taken, when there is a clear risk of the contrary, that is, the abandonment or limitation of treatment in particular patient cases taking in to account the context of the economic crisis the society is going through and the doubts about the sustainability of the health systems very different from that we had a few years ago.
Page 4 n 10 bis: In the context of an economic crisis like the one we are in and its likely impact in a medium and long term, end of life ethical issues should not only be restricted to the consideration of the risk of adopting therapeutic futile measures. The opposite attitude should also be addressed concerning the lack in some cases of an implementation and limitation of therapeutic measures.
Justification: The introduction of the new text will prevent certain unilateralism in considering that the only risk that the patient and the medical team have concerns exclusively the therapeutic futility or non futility of the measures taken, when there is a clear risk of the contrary, that is, the abandonment or limitation of treatment in particular patient cases taking in to account the context of the economic crisis the society is going through and the doubts about the sustainability of the health systems very different from that we had a few years ago.
3. Replacement amendment
Page 5: Where the document says
adaptation, limitation or withdrawal, we proposed
to replace the term limitation
for appropriate.
Justification: the term appropriate is preferable to avoid the negative connotations that the term limitation has.
Justification: the term appropriate is preferable to avoid the negative connotations that the term limitation has.
4. Addition Amendment
Page 5: After adaptation,
withdrawal or limitation, the following should be added: In relation to the
latter term, discussions should be taken on board concerning the ways on how doctors,
patients and their families approach the specific problems posed by some
decisions relative to withdrawing therapeutic measures.
Justification: Clinical experience seems to
show that it is more controversial, even if only for purely emotional reasons,
the withdrawal of therapeutic measures than the decision not to apply them for
considering futile.
5. Addition Amendment
Page 6, p 16: At the end, add the following: A
large number of legislations have incorporated the right of the patient to
restrict the type and amount of information he/she wants to know.
6. Addition Amendment
Page 9 p 31: Add a new paragraph 31bis
indicating the following: “Treatments at the end of life must conform to the
same lex artis requirements than may have other treatments in a different
context. Thus, the request or demand for a specific treatment can not be
equated to the request for the rejection of treatment.
Justification: There is a risk of pressure on
healthcare teams to apply treatments that in some cases are not appropriate
without regard to the requirements of the lex artis.
7. Addition Amendment
Page 10, p 36: At the end, add the following: In
this context it would be appropriate to indicate that it may be convenient that
the expressed desires and wishes of the patient, manifested to the persons in
care, are to be reflected in the clinical record.
8. Addition Amendment
Page 13, p 50: Add at the end of the sentence:
In any case, regardless of the position you hold it is important to clarify
that the effectiveness of these documents must be in harmony with the context
in which they are to be effectively implemented and with the requirements of
the lex artis.
Justification: It is important to prevent the use
of such documents in a routinely and indiscriminating manner. The ethical
problems that may arise for its implementation in a variety of contexts should
carefully be considered.
9. Addition Amendment
Page 15, p 57: The importance of having family
meetings during the decision making process should be stressed in order for the
family members to be aware of the actual clinical situation of the patient.
10. Addition Amendment
Page 16 point 1, the doctor: Include at the end
of point 59 a
comma and add the following text: shall ensure the benefit of patients,
especially in conditions of large fragility and vulnerability.
Justification: This is
at the heart of the ethical duty
of the physician.
lunes, 6 de mayo de 2013
Retirada Administración Obama en pildora abortiva. OBAMA ADMIN. SURRENDERS IN ABORTION PILL MANDATE CASE
OBAMA ADMIN. SURRENDERS IN ABORTION PILL MANDATE CASE
DOJ apparently nervous to continue argument that Bible publisher isn’t religious enough for religious exemption
5/6/2013
Attorney sound bite: Matt Bowman
WASHINGTON — At the government’s own request, a federal appellate court Friday dismissed the Obama administration’s appeal of an order that stopped the president from enforcing his abortion pill mandate against a Bible publisher. The administration’s retreat marks the first total appellate victory on a preliminary injunction in any abortion pill mandate case.
Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing Tyndale House Publishers say the administration is apparently nervous about trying to defend its position that a Bible publisher is not religious enough for a religious exemption to the mandate.
“Bible publishers should be free to do business according to the book that they publish,” said Senior Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. “The government dismissed its appeal because it knows how ridiculous it sounds arguing that a Bible publisher isn’t religious enough to qualify as a religious employer. For the government to say that a Bible publisher isn’t religious is outrageous, and now the Obama administration has had to retreat in court.”
“We will continue to argue that the administration cannot disregard the Constitution’s protection of religious freedom for all family business owners and must offer a comprehensive exemption to the mandate,” Bowman added.
The abortion pill mandate is a component of ObamaCare that forces employers, regardless of their religious or moral convictions, to provide insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception under threat of heavy penalties.
Tyndale House Publishers, based in Carol Stream, Ill., specifically objects to covering abortifacients. It is the world’s largest privately held Christian publisher of books, Bibles, and digital media and directs 96.5 percent of its profits to religious non-profit causes worldwide.
Friday’s order from U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit means the preliminary injunction issued by a district court in November of last year will stand while the case, Tyndale House Publishers v. Sebelius, moves forward.
Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys and allied attorneys are also litigating nine other lawsuits against the mandate. The lawsuits represent a large cross-section of Protestants and Catholics who object to the mandate.
Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing Tyndale House Publishers say the administration is apparently nervous about trying to defend its position that a Bible publisher is not religious enough for a religious exemption to the mandate.
“Bible publishers should be free to do business according to the book that they publish,” said Senior Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. “The government dismissed its appeal because it knows how ridiculous it sounds arguing that a Bible publisher isn’t religious enough to qualify as a religious employer. For the government to say that a Bible publisher isn’t religious is outrageous, and now the Obama administration has had to retreat in court.”
“We will continue to argue that the administration cannot disregard the Constitution’s protection of religious freedom for all family business owners and must offer a comprehensive exemption to the mandate,” Bowman added.
The abortion pill mandate is a component of ObamaCare that forces employers, regardless of their religious or moral convictions, to provide insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception under threat of heavy penalties.
Tyndale House Publishers, based in Carol Stream, Ill., specifically objects to covering abortifacients. It is the world’s largest privately held Christian publisher of books, Bibles, and digital media and directs 96.5 percent of its profits to religious non-profit causes worldwide.
Friday’s order from U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit means the preliminary injunction issued by a district court in November of last year will stand while the case, Tyndale House Publishers v. Sebelius, moves forward.
Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys and allied attorneys are also litigating nine other lawsuits against the mandate. The lawsuits represent a large cross-section of Protestants and Catholics who object to the mandate.
- Pronunciation guide: Bowman (BOH-min’)
Alliance Defending Freedom is an alliance-building, non-profit legal organization that advocates for the right of people to freely live out their faith.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)