Are bioethicists ethical?

Bioethicists play an increasingly important role in the development of medical research, as they are required to serve on IRBs that evaluate proposals for experimental procedures. But who exactly are these “ethicists”? Are they truly unbiased or are they influenced by donations or compensation for serving on these committees?

There is no license to be a bioethicist, which leads to the concern that anyone can call themselves an “ethicist”, or a philosopher who is competent to evaluate morality and ethics in practical cases. Some argue that they often don’t share the views of the majority of Americans, and are therefore not representative of the Nation’s values.

In addition to this, concerns have been raised about the compensation, donations, rewards, or gifts ethicists receive for serving on these panels. When they accept donations for university programs or are paid consultants of bioethics firms, does this create impartiality? Some ethicists are paid $200 for serving on an IRB, whereas other are paid $1000. It is difficult not to think of $1000 as more than just an "de minimus" bonus. Companies may be choosing their ethicists based on their affiliations, in order to predict their opinion on the matter. When do ethicists cease to be unbiased and become merely public relations tools for corporate institutions?

There are also cases of manipulation of ethicists by limiting the information that is provided to them. The company Advanced Cell Technology generated controversy when one of their ethicists was asked by a reporter what he thought of a company’s decision to clone an endangered animal, and his answer was that it was “playing god”. It was then revealed that the company was Advanced Cell Technology itself. These cases make us question the role of bioethicists in the advances of scientific research.

Sources: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/02/us/bioethicists-find-themselves-the-ones-being-scrutinized.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm