COURSE SYLLABUS

Course Title: Life and Biomedical Ethics

Course Description:
Examines and revisits theological and ethical positions
on “life” – issues and questions at the beginning of life
including reproductive technologies; issues and
questions at the end of life including palliative care. It
also reflects on some miscellaneous issues on
biomedical ethics from religion to laws and politics,
from technology to addictions. The course aims to
dialogue the positions of the Magisterium on these
issues and those contemporary theologians and experts
from different traditions and cultures.

Course Placement: January 24, 31

February 7, 14, 21, 28
March 7, 14, 21, 28
April 4, 11, 18, 25
May 2, 9, 16, 23,

Credit Unit: Three (3) Units; Lectures and discussion with literature
review/case presentation.

Learning Goals: At the level of knowledge, this course teaches and

enlightens the students on the moral and ethical issues
especially on the field of biomedical ethics.

At the level of skills, this course intends to train and

coach students’ capacity to critically analyze issues on
the beginning and end of life decisions and questions
affecting human life.

At the level of attitudes, this course desires to stimulate

the students to have a decisive and reflective attitude
towards moral and ethical problems and encourages
the students to have a positive attitude towards life-
long learning and continuous discernment on the light
of Christian faith and tradition.

1|Page
Course Content

I. Preliminaries
a. Discussions on the course syllabus
b. Structures of comparative analysis
c. Structures of literature review
d. Structures/models of case presentation
e. Discussions on the position paper

II. Life and Biomedical Ethics

a. Theological Ethics of Life
b. History, Nature and Relevance of Medical Ethics
c. Moral Principles of Biomedical Ethics

III. Ethical Theories and Methods of Ethics

a. Foundational Polarity of Moral Discourse
b. The Human Person and Personalism
c. Care Ethics
d. Three Dimensional Ethics of Responsibility
e. Consequentialism vs Utilitarianism
f. Method and Moral Justification
g. Bioethical Decision Making

IV. Moral/Ethical Issues/Questions

a. Issues at the Beginning of Life
1. Conventional and Traditional Issues
2. Reproductive Technologies issues
- Assisted Reproductive Technology
- Stem Cell Research
- Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis/Prenatal Diagnosis
- Cloning
- Donor Insemination
- Abortion
2. Human Genetics Issues
- Genetic Interventions and Personal Identity
- Genetics and Culture
- Ethics, Genetics and Human Gene Therapy
- Nanotechnology
- Extending Human Life Span
b. Issues at the End of Life
2|Page
 1. Terminal Sedation
2. Euthanasia
3. PVS Patient
4. Artificial Nutrition and Hydration
5. Resuscitation of Preterm Infant against Parental Wishes
6. Withdrawing and Withholding of Life Sustaining Treatment
c. Miscellaneous Issues
1. Religion and Medicine
2. Addictions
3. Technology and progress

Course Requirements:

1. Comparative analysis
2. Literature/Article Review
3. Case Presentation
4. Position Paper
5. Assign Readings

References:

1. Books
Beuachamp, Tom and Childress, James. Principle of Biomedical Ethics Fifth Edition. 2001.
________________________________. Principle of Biomedical Ethics Sixth Edition. 2009.
Gastmans, Chris et al. Editors. New Pathways for European Bioethics. 2007.
Gastmans, Chris. Between Technology and Humanity. 2002.
Furrow, Dwight. Ethics Key Concept in Philosophy. 2005.
Podimattan, Felix. Biomedical Ethics Vol 1. 2014.
______________. Biomedical Ethics Vol 2. 2014.
______________. Biomedical Ethics Vol 3. 2014
______________. Biomedical Ethics Vol 4. 2014
______________. Biomedical Ethics Vol 5. 2014
______________. Biomedical Ethics Vol 6. 2014
______________. Biomedical Ethics Vol 7. 2014
______________. Biomedical Ethics Vol 8. 2014
______________. Biomedical Ethics Vol 9. 2014
______________. Biomedical Ethics Vol 10. 2014
Walter, James and Shannon, Thomas. Contemporary Issues in Bioethics. 2005.

2. Journals
Dignitas Personae. Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith.

3|Page
Ethics of Science and Technology. UNESCO.
Human Cloning. UNESCO.
International Declaration on Human Genetic Data. UNESCO.
Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. UNESCO.
Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights. UNESCO.

3. Websites (Keywords)
These are suggested keywords. There are lots of websites under this
course.

a. American Journal of Bioethics

b. Bioethics
c. Cambridge Quarterly of Health Care Ethics
d. Hastings Center Report
e. Health Policy
f. Journal of Medical Ethics
g. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics
h. Milbank Quarterly
i. Nursing Ethics
j. American Journal of Law and Medicine
k. BMC Medical Ethics
l. Christian Bioethics
m. Developing World Bioethics
n. Ethical Perspective
o. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice
p. Ethics and Medicine
q. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics
r. IRB Ethics and Human Research
s. Journal of Clinical Ethics
t. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy
u. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal
v. Medical Humanities
w. Medicine Health Care and Philosophy
x. Monash Bioethics Review
y. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly
z. Research Ethics Review

Instruction on Comparative Analysis

4|Page
 1. Each student will submit a comparative analysis.
2. Assign documents will be given.

Preparation
1. The student will need to read the two (2) documents – Dignitas
Personae and the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights.
2. Compare and contrasts the two documents.
3. Using one of the documents as your lens, make a reaction-analysis on
the documents.
4. Access the documents via Adamson Blackboard – Life and Biomedical
Ethics (as the case maybe)

Description
1. The two (2) documents as mentioned above will be given to the students
during the first day of class.
2. The comparative analysis should not be shorter than five (5) pages.

Submission
1. The comparative analysis should be submitted during the second week
class in digital copy. –January 31, 2023
2. Non-compliance may lead to failing mark.

Instruction for Literature Review

1. Each student will present one (1) literature review during the course.
2. Submit at least three (3) literatures for review. Among the three (3)
literatures one will be selected for review and presentation.

Preparation

1. The student will select a text that has been published in the
scientific/religious literature. This text can be an article in a
scientific/religious journal in the area of moral or ethical literature or in
medical professional literature. It can be also be a chapter in a book
discussing moral/ethical arguments.
2. The article or book chapter selected must be a recent contribution in the
field of morals/ethics and it should be published during the last five (5)
years.
5|Page
 3. The selected publication should discuss report or describe an issue, topic
or problem which is relevant for the discipline in morals or in ethics.
4. The language of the selected journal or book should be in English.

Description

1. The selected article or chapter will be distributed to the students a week in

advance before his or her presentation. All students should read the article
(This will serve as your assigned readings). The selected article will also be
provided to the course facilitator together with a critical analysis of the
article.
2. The analysis should not be longer than ten (10) pages and should include
the elements described below.

Dissemination

1. The three (3) literatures should be given to the course facilitator during the
third meeting. –February 07, 2023
2. The literatures should be given in digital copy.
3. Non-compliance may lead to failing mark.

Presentation

1. The course facilitator will discuss at the beginning of the semester the
exact timing of the presentations.
2. Each review of literature presentations will take fifteen (15) minutes: ten
(10) minutes for presentation and five (5) minutes for discussions and
questions.
3. The presenting student conducts the presentation (in power point); he/she
will also moderate the discussion.
4. The presentation will follow a specific structure.
- Objective of the presentation
- Motivation in selecting the literature
- Contribution
- Location of the selected literature
- Summary of the selected literature
- Critical Review
- Open Discussion
- Conclusion

6|Page
Assessment

1. The literature review will be evaluated by the course facilitator and fellow
students.
2. The assessment will follow the items on the evaluation form.
3. The grading will be on the scale of 0-25.
4. If the grade is lower than 15, another literature review needs to be
presented again.

Evaluation Form for Literature Review

Name: Grade
Date:
7|Page
 Article:

very low low fair high excellent

Presentation 1 2 3 4 5

Contribution 1 2 3 4 5

Motivation 1 2 3 4 5

Critical Review 1 2 3 4 5

Management Discussion 1 2 3 4 5

Comments:

Evaluated by: Conforme:

Instruction for Case Presentation

8|Page
 1. Each student will present one (1) case of his or her choice during the
course.
2. Submit at least three (3) cases for presentation. Among the three (3)
cases one will be selected for presentation.

Preparation

1. The student will select a case from a published journal or book.

2. The case can be an article in a scientific/religious journal in the area of
moral or ethical literature or in medical professional literature. It can be
also be a chapter in a book discussing moral/ethical arguments.
3. The case selected must be recent and in the field of morals/ethics and
should be published during the last 5-7 years.
4. The selected case should discuss report or describe an issue, topic or
problem which is relevant for the discipline in morals or in ethics.
5. The language of the selected case should be in English.

Description

1. The selected case will be presented and discussed during the course. In
order to facilitate the case discussion, the student needs to prepare a
description of the case. This description will be distributed among other
students a week before his or her scheduled presentation (This will served
as your assigned reading).
2. For this purpose, the case must be described for a maximum of five
hundred (500) words.
3. The case analysis should be provided to the facilitator at least one (1) week
in advance. It should contain at least the following components:
Determination of the moral/ethical problem at hand, description and
interpretation of the relevant facts, assessment of the values and norms,
determination of a reasonable course of action including the most relevant
reasons for it.
4. The case analysis should not be longer than fifteen (15) pages.

Dissemination

9|Page
 1. The case description(s) should be given to the course facilitator on the
seventh week after the start of the semester. –March 07, 2023
2. The case description can be given either in digital copy.
3. The case analysis should be given to the facilitator at least one week
before his or her presentation.
4. The student should disseminate the case description to his/her fellows one
week before the scheduled presentation.
5. Non-compliance may lead to failing mark.

Presentation

1. The course facilitator will discuss at the beginning of the semester the
exact timing of the case presentations.
2. Each case presentation and discussion will take thirty (30) minutes; twenty
five (25) minutes for presentation and five (5) minutes allotted for
questions and clarifications.
3. The presentation (in power point) is conducted by the presenting student;
he/she will also facilitate the deliberation.
4. The case presentation may use a structure or protocols presented during
the course.

Assessment

1. The case presentation will be evaluated by the course facilitator and fellow
students.
2. The assessment will follow items on the evaluation form.
3. The grading will be in the scale of 0-30.
4. If the grade is lower than 20, another case needs to be presented during
the course.

Evaluation Form for Case Analysis

10 | P a g e
 Name: Grade
Date:
Case Title:

very low low fair high excellent

Presentation 1 2 3 4 5

Systematic Change of 1 2 3 4 5
Perspective

Critical Analysis of 1 2 3 4 5
Moral /Ethical Problem

Moral/Ethical Reasoning 1 2 3 4 5

Conclusion 1 2 3 4 5

Management Discussion 1 2 3 4 5

Comments:

Evaluated by: Conforme:

Instruction of Position Paper

11 | P a g e
 1. Each student will submit a position paper.
2. The students choose any particular issues in the field of biomedical
ethics

Preparation
1. The student will need to decide what particular issues in the biomedical
ethics they are interested to write in their position paper.
2. Once decision was made, student should work on their paper at their
own phase.

Description
1. The position paper should contain moral and ethical arguments and
principles to either to support or negate the moral issues or ethical
problem that the student had chosen.
2. The student will have a freehand to use any conceptual framework in
the discussion of his or her position on the particular issue.
3. The position paper should not be longer than fifteen (15) pages.

Submission
1. The position paper should be submitted during the last meeting.
2. Non-compliance may lead to failing mark.

Structure of Literature Review

12 | P a g e
1. Background of the literature
- title
- author/authors
- context
- abstract if there is any
- others

2. Locate the article

- name of journal or book
- name of publisher
- date of publication
-source of the article
- others

3. Objectives
- formulate your objectives
- what are your end-goals

4. Motivation
- reasons for selecting the article
- factors why the articles should be presented
- inspiration of choosing the article
- others

5. Contribution
- describe the contribution of the article
- relevance of the article
-importance of the article
- moral/ethical value of the article

6. Summary
- synopsis of the article
- description of the selected article
-main points of the article
- moral arguments presented in the article
- others

7. Critical Review
- critical evaluation of the article

13 | P a g e
 - moral/ethical analysis of the article
- moral/ethical implication or consequences of the article
- others

8. Open Discussion
- questions
- clarifications
- interventions
- others

9. Conclusions
- conclude your presentation

Case Analysis

MODEL 1: SVST METHOD OF ETHICAL AND MORAL CASE DELIBERATION

I. Narratives of the case

-describe the case

II. The moral and ethical problem

-what is the moral/ethical problem

III. Facts
- medical facts
- how the patient has been diagnosed and what is the prognosis?
-what kind of treatment can be suggested?
-does this treatment have a positive effect on the prognosis? To
what extent?
- what will be the prognosis when this treatment is not prolonged?
-what are the chances of success with the treatment?
-could the treatment be harmful to the patient’s health?
-other medical data

- patient’s values and social dimension

-what is known about the patient’s outlook in life?
-does the patient belong to a religious community?
14 | P a g e
 -what is the patient’s social background?
-what are the consequences of his illness and treatment for the
family, lifestyle and social position?
-do these consequences go beyond the strength of the patient and
his/her environment?

- organizational dimension
-can the patient’s need of care be realized? (capacity, staff,
equipment)

IV. Assessment
-welfare of the patient
-what are the consequences of illness and treatment for the well
being of the patient? (joy in life, freedom of movement, physical and
mental wellbeing, pain, shortening of life, fear, etc.)
-autonomy of the patient
-has the patient been well informed about his situation?
-has the patient been sufficiently involved in the decision-making
process?
-what is the judgment on the pros and cons of the treatment?
-which values and opinions of the patient are relevant?
-what is his view on life sustaining or intensive therapy?
-is it right to leave the decision whether to treat or not the patient?
-moral/ethical principles
-what moral and ethical principles can be applied on the case?
-are the moral/ethical principles applied appropriate for the case?
-how do these moral/ethical principles determine the morality of the
case?

V. Pastoral Engagement
-church teaching and tradition
-what do the social teachings of the church, encyclicals,
exhortations, documents,doctrines and traditions pronounce about
the case?
-what are the stands of other religion on the case?
-pastoral elements
-what are the pastoral elements of the case?
-what is the context of the case?
-what will be your pastoral consideration on the case?

15 | P a g e
VI. Decision-making
-what is the moral problem in this case?
-are important facts still unknown? Is it nevertheless possible to take
a responsible decision?
-could the problem be interpreted in terms of (conflicting) values?
-is there a way out of this dilemma?
-which alternative way of acting is most in keeping with patient’s
values?
-what other argument are relevant to this decision?
-which act is preferable on the basis of the aforementioned
arguments? (treatment, changes in care, consultation, referral,
awaiting, etc.)
-what are the actual obligations of the persons involved?
-which questions remain unanswered?
-in which cases should the decision be revised?
-in what way can the decision and the evaluation be summarized?
-what are the pastoral considerations of the case?
-has pastoral element considered?
-could the problem be appropriated pastorally?
-are all available means to solve the problem considered?
-what is the implication of the decision to the church teachings?

MODEL II: HERMENEUTIC CONVERSATION/DIALOGUE ABOUT CLINICAL CASES

I. The case
- describe the case

II. Primary intuitions (initial reactions)

- what is your first intuitive reaction to the case
- which perspective is being taken up?
- A case is always recounted in a certain way. From the expressions
and the jargon used, it is often possible to recognize from which
professional group a person is speaking.

III. Analysis of narrative perspectives (perspective and style)

16 | P a g e
 - how is the case recounted? who is speaking?
- what is the perspective of the narrator, what phrases are used? what is
the style, the color of the story?
- recount the story from the perspective of a different character.
- recount the story again, but now from the perspective of yet another
character and in two different ways.
- how is the problem/story presented?
- the story that is recounted has a certain structure, a plot, a development
but it also has content: something is being imparted, a message or
question.

IV. Analysis of narratives (narrative structure)

- describe the structure and plot of the story
- alter some elements for example a different composition or a
development or result or different characters, a man instead of a woman, a
nurse instead of a doctor. Someone whose competence is being doubted
instead of someone whose competence is beyond dispute. Check whether
the plot remains the same or whether it changes.
- content of the story
- consider the case as an illustration of a general problem
- what is the general problem of which this story is an example
- now try to name other examples of the same general problem from
your own experience or from the literature.
-what are the materials of the story?
- in the story, certain words, phrases and concepts are at the center.

V. Components of the narrative

- keywords
- what are the central elements, the core concepts of this story?
- what is the actual meaning of these concepts?
- ethical theories
- recount the stories again but now in terms of norms, duties and
rights
- recount the story again but now in terms of values and ideals
- recount the story again but now in terms if virtues and vices

VI. Back to the case

- significance of considerations for the case, difference to primary
intuitions

17 | P a g e
 - what do these reflections mean for the case? Have they changed your
view on it? What is the difference with your first intuitive reaction? What
have you learned?

MODEL III: CLINICAL PRAGMATISM

I. The case
- describe the case

II. Assessment of the clinical situation

- careful analysis of the clinical situation
- contextual factors of the case implying the first and foremost the
perspectives of the other professional groups as well as their contributions
to care giving.
- analysis of the needs and wishes of the patient and his or her loved ones
- analysis of competing interest, issues of power or conflict and
institutional factors
- widening of different perspectives
- broader organizational ethical issues

III. Moral diagnosis

- make a clinical inventory
- frame the moral problem
- clinical assessment narrative
- presentation of moral intuitions and stories
- ranking of moral considerations
- consider other ethical guidelines and standards
- comparison to other cases

IV. Goal setting, decision making and implementation

- determining goals of treatment and care
- agreement on interventions to meet the patient’s needs
- specify the goals
- decide and implement an action plan

V. Evaluation
- outcome of case deliberation can be re-considered

18 | P a g e
 - evaluation accounts for (1) the preliminary character of ethical principles,
(2) the variability of the clinical situation and (3) the openness and
flexibility of ethical deliberation.

Schedule of Literature Review

March 07 – Montano D; Wenceslao R; Tuscano E

March 14 – Nguyen Xuan; Balberan B; Nguyen Tam
March 21 – Del Mundo P; Luistro H; Estor R
March 28 – Calatcat C; Pelaje K; Pantonilla;
April 04 – Boquiron E; Nguyen Huu; Moraga G
April 11 – Saguing N; Andrin J; Panizales R
April 18 – Calindong V., Cunanan R., Wenceslao R.
Schedule of Case Presentation

April 25 – Moraga G/Saguing N; Pantonilla R/Panizales R

May 02 – Calindong V/Andrin J; Balberan B/Del Mundo P
May 9 – Estor O/Pelaje K; Nguyen Tam/Calatcat C
May 16 – Montano D/Wenceslao R; Boquiron E/Nguyen Huu
May 23 – Nguyen Xuan /Luistro H; Tuscano E. Cunanan R.

19 | P a g e