Alexander P. Anishchenko, Cand. Sc. (Pedagogy), Dr. Sc. (Biology), Docent, Head of the Department of UNESCO, physical upbringing and healthy lifestyle, Russian University of Medicine of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7924-8505, e-mail: Alxanichenko@gmail.com
Konstantin V. Zorin, Cand. Sc. (Medicine), Docent, Department of UNESCO, physical upbringing and healthy lifestyle, Russian University of Medicine of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8819-6818, е-mail: zkv1000@yandex.ru
Victor A. Toporkov, Dr. Sc. (Philosophy), Docent, Docent, Department of UNESCO, physical upbringing and healthy lifestyle, Russian University of Medicine of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5483-1668, е-mail: toporkov@msmsu.ru
Dmitry A. Pustovalov, Cand. Sc. (Medicine), Docent, Department of UNESCO, physical upbringing and healthy lifestyle, Russian University of Medicine of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5408-5244, е-mail: pustovalovda@gmail.com
A comparative analysis of conservative, liberal and ultra-liberal bioethics shows how social, philosophical and cultural approaches influence the perception and solution of ethical problems in biomedicine. The following methods were used in the work: study and analysis of specialized literature, synthesis, modeling, comparison, generalization, system analysis, theoretical knowledge. The authors of the article conclude that ethical norms can be understood conservatively, liberally or ultra-liberally. In this regard, they have a significant impact on health care, legislation, public and state life. A comparative analysis of these similarities and differences helps to conduct a constructive dialogue about the future of biomedicine and biotechnology in the context of contemporary Russian politics.
Keywords: conservative bioethics, liberal bioethics, ultra-liberal bioethics
Conflict of interests: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Funding. The study had no sponsor support.
References
1. Beauchamp, T.L., Childress, J.F. Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994. 546 р.
2. Lewis, V. Bioethics: Principles, issues and cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 832 p.
3. Montgomery, J. Bioethics as a governance practice. Health care analysis. 2016. No. 24 (1). Р. 3–23.
4. Zasukhina, V.N. Fundamentals of conservative bioethics: a textbook. Chita: ZabGGPU, 2007. 112 p. (In Rus.)
5. Siluyanova, I.V. Selected. On the calling of a doctor. Moscow: Form, 2008. 257 p. (In Rus.)
6. Siluyanova, I.V., Pischikova, L.E. Bioethics: definition and types. Federal scientific and practical journal. 2020. No. 1 (25). P. 9–16. (In Rus.)
7. Tishchenko, P.D. On the edges of life and death: philosophical studies of the foundations of bioethics. St. Petersburg: Publishing house “Mir”, 2011. 327 p. (In Rus.)
8. Zdoryk, M.V. Comparative analysis of conservative and liberal explications of bioethics. Youth World Politic. 2013. No. 4. P. 58–64. (In Rus.)
9. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of November 9, 2022 No. 809 “On approval of the fundamentals of state policy for the preservation and strengthening of traditional Russian spiritual and moral values”. URL: http://www.kremlin.ru/acts/bank/48502 (In Rus.)
10. Zorin, K.V. Problems of ethical and deontological education of medical students. Infectious diseases: news, opinions, training. 2021. Vol. 10. No. 1. P. 89–92.
11. Zorin, K.V. Ethical aspects of the concept of development of healthcare, training and work of a doctor. Medical education and professional development. 2019. Vol. 10. No. 4. P. 116–123.
12. Donald Trump has revealed what awaits America’s LGBT youth during his new presidential term. URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROD57rGM3vI
13. Narotchnitskaya, N.A. Democracy, liberalism and human rights. URL: http://worldcrisis.ru/crisis/2726071
.png)
