DNA database against human rights

Last week the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the storage of DNA and fingerprints (biodata) of innocent individuals in the UK was an infringement of human rights and “could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society.” Such information breached a persons right to privacy.
Police have been ordered to destroy over 1.6 billion samples. The Government and police argue however that storing this information is a key weapon in fighting crime.

1. Would you feel that your right to privacy had been violated if your DNA information were stored for police reference?
2. Is the storage of this information reasonable if it helps the police do their job?
3. Should everyone have their DNA on a database to help with police investigations? What issues might this raise?
4. Is there an alternative solution?

In the news - Euthanasia: Debbie Purdy & Dan James

Purdy's Quest For Clarity
Debbie Purdy, 45, suffers from MS and plans to travel to Switzerland to end her life if her situation becomes unbearable. She has been seeking clarification from the courts on whether her husband will face prosecution if he helps her to do this.
Note;
'..since October 2002 up to 100 British citizens have travelled abroad for the purpose of lawfully obtaining an assisted suicide. But in no case had a prosecution resulted..' [www.timesonline.co.uk 30/10/08]

Her efforts have been unsuccessful, it was concluded that her '..human rights were not infringed by the current state of the law..' [www.timesonline.co.uk 30/10/08] Purdy plans to appeal but has also directed attention towards Parliament, stressing the need to reconsider the 1961 Suicide Act arguing for a change to the law on assisted suicide.

Debbie Purdy claims that she may have to end her life earlier than necessary (while she is still able to), in order to avoid putting her husband at risk of prosecution.
Click here for a clip from Sky news, a Times Online article and further links.

Dan James
23 year old Dan, from Worcester, played for Nuneaton Rugby Club where he became paralysed from the chest down following a training accident last year.
In September Dan travelled to a Swiss euthanasia clinic with his parents to receive assisted suicide. Police are currently investigating his death.

Dr Peter Saunders of the Care Not Killing Alliance fears a 'slippery slope' where assisted suicide has been granted initially for terminal conditions such as some cancers and motor neuron disease, then for chronic illness and now disabilities.
Click here for more on the case.

• Should politicians review the law on assisted suicide and legalise it?
• If it is legal in some countries, why not here?
• Should we have the right to manage our own deaths?
• Why do some people choose assisted suicide, whereas others do not?
• Debbie Purdy sufferers from a terminal illness, Dan James from a disablility. Do these different circumstances raise different issues about legalising assisted suicide?

Links;
Dignity in Dying
Care Not Killing

Should people with dementia feel an obligation to die?

'People with dementia should be able to end their lives if they feel they are a burden to others or to the NHS, according to a respected ethicist...Baroness Mary Warnock'

'Rebecca Wood, chief executive of the Alzheimer’s Research Trust, strongly criticised the peer's comments.
"Lady Warnock demonstrates a shocking ignorance when espousing her highly insensitive view that people with dementia are 'wasting people’s lives' and may have a 'duty to die. ' [BBC News 19/9/08]

• Are dementia sufferers an unacceptable drain on medical and family resources?


• When, if ever, should a person feel a 'duty to die'?


• Should dementia sufferers be valued differently to other people?


• Should euthanasia be legalised in the UK?

Organ Donation and Presumed Consent

Over 8000 people each year are waiting for an organ donation (1000 die having not recieved one.) Currently people 'opt-in' to organ donation by carrying a donor card and/or signing up to the NHS Organ Donor Register to indicate their wishes after death.

Is a system of presumed consent the solution? Hospitals could assume consent to remove organs after an individual dies, unless they have 'opted out' or a family member objects.

Views:

The Prime Minister says that such a facility would save thousands of lives and that he hopes such a system can start this year. "A system of this kind seems to have the potential to close the aching gap between the potential benefits of transplant surgery in the UK and the limits imposed by our current system of consent," [12/4/08] (www.telegraph.co.uk)

Prof. John Fabre, from King's College London and a former president of the British Transplantation Society... "Presumed consent would degrade the ethical framework of our society and change a system of organ donation based on generosity and compassion into one of the state taking back what it thinks is its, while intruding on one of the most personal and delicate moments of a families life." [5/9/08] (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/)

• What impact does presumed consent have on a persons rights over their own body?


• Will there be a conflict of interests for medical staff in saving one life and seeking the organs to save another?
  
• How will this impact on families? Could it be a more sensitive approach than medical staff having to ask about organ donation immediately after the death of a loved one?


• Will it increase the numbers of lives saved?

Sport and Politics: The Beijing Olympics

'In bidding for the 2008 Games, the Chinese promised to improve matters. Yet, under President Hu Jintao the government has tightened the screw on political dissidents, non-governmental organisations, internet users and ethnic minorities......It is often said that sport and politics should not mix. With the Games being wholly or partly financed by governments, they inevitably do...' [extract Telegraph.co.uk 11/4/08]


'Fears that tomorrow’s (6/4/08) Olympic flame relay through London could be disrupted by violence intensified after it emerged that eight Tibetan protesters had been shot dead by Chinese police.' [extract Timesonline 5/4/08]

'London's relay saw protesters trying to douse and even snatch the Olympic flame as athletes and celebrities carried it through the city.' [extract news.bbc 7/4/08]

[Image: New York City protest March 2008]

'More than 40 athletes taking part in the Beijing Olympics have today signed an open letter addressed to China's government urging it to respect human rights and freedom of religion, particularly in Tibet.' [extract Guardian.co.uk 7/8/08]

Four Free Tibet protesters including two Britons are arrested for hanging giant banners opposite Beijing's Olympic Stadium on a day of protests against the Chinese government. Watch here and for other protests and video viewpoints.

• Should sport and politics be kept separate...can they be?


• Should we or other countries have boycotted the olympics because of China's human rights issues - including restricted freedom of speech, internet censorship, detaining people, death penality, Tibet?


• Has the olympics had a positive role in at least raising peoples awareness?

You may want to check out Amnesty Internationals' website.

The Abortion Debate

The 1967 Abortion Act gave a legal defence to those carrying out abortions in England, Scotland and Wales. The original Abortion Act allowed abortions upto 28 weeks, this was revised by the Human Fertility and Embryology Act in 1990 to 24 weeks (due to advances in medical technologies more and more premature babies were able to survive - were 'viable' - before 28 weeks).

This year MPs voted for the first time since 1990 on whether to reduce the abortion upper limit, ultimately voting to keep it at 24 weeks.

'Gordon Brown voted against any reduction after insisting there was no medical evidence to justify a change in the law' [21st May 2008 Telegraph.co.uk]

Find out more here and about some of the arguments for and against, then leave your comments.

Should the upper limit have been reduced...or increased....should abortions be legal at all?

What is the Lambeth Conference?

Find out here.

What are your thoughts on the 'key issues that will dominate' such as women bishops and gay clergy?

[Dr Rowan Williams - The Archbishop of Canterbury]

Welcome!

Welcome to the new Philosophy, Ethics, Religion and Critical Thinking blog. A place to share and discuss current issues, moral and philosophical questions.
We will post articles, viewpoints and interesting resources for you to read and comment on which we hope you will do. Also let us know if there are any items you would like us to consider posting for comment.