• 4lan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Obviously that’s why they were shut down. There were serious ethical issues…

    But why did we throw out the baby with the bathwater? Why throw them on the streets instead of fixing the system?

    Of course I don’t want people with anxiety locked up. What about we give very mentally ill a place to go? And those who are hurting themselves or others are sent there against their will.

    • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well, anyone could say somrone was crazy and they’d maybe get locked up. Women were getting diagnosed with hysteria and lobotomized. You can’t really fix a system that takes away people’s autonomy as the main feature of that system. Like people who get PTSD and are disempowered are the ones being diagnosed and locked up - even though it actually seems pretty rational to develop PTSD from the stuff they went through. So are they actually crazy, or are they victims?

      It’s really not that simple, and this is forced imprisonment we’re talking about here. Not even in the fields of ethics and bioethics do we have concrete answers.

      https://journals.academiczone.net/index.php/ijfe/article/view/2261

      The article discusses an approach to solving bioethics problems through consensus and the establishment of conditional demarcation boundaries within the legal field. The author notes the lack of general criteria for assessing positions, which leads to an “eternal discussion” and makes some problems, such as abortion, euthanasia and biomedical experiment, fundamentally insoluble. Existing bioethical theories consider problems from an axiological position, remaining divorced from ontological foundations. The issue of abortion has historically depended on the dominant type of worldview - pantheistic, theistic, deistic and atheistic. The resolution of such issues is determined by external factors, which creates the ground for conflicts in society. The author calls for a deeper understanding of human nature and ideological dialogues to resolve bioethical contradictions.