Stem cells, end-of-life, and predispositions to violence

It’s been quite a week in the field of medical ethics. Take a look atthese articles gathered by the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity:

A federalappeals court upheld a lower court’s ruling that dismissed a lawsuit claiming NIHfunding for research on human embryonic stem cells violates a law banningfederal funds for research that harms or destroys human embryos. (ScienceInsider)

Britain’s HighCourt on Thursday rejected an attempt by a man wanting to overturn thecountry’s euthanasia law. (Businessweek)

The family of aMuslim man left in an apparently vegetative state after a heart attack fiveweeks ago caused severe brain damage have begun an appeal to ensure he will begiven life-saving treatment, against the advice of clinicians, if his conditionworsens. (Guardian)

An article explores whether post-market drug trials need more ethics. (Scientific American)

Many U.S.organizations recruiting egg donors online don’t adhere to ethical guidelines.  (Fox News)

A Pennsylvaniawoman whose autistic adult son was not recommended for a heart transplant wantsto bring more attention to the decision-making process so that those withailments or disabilities are not passed over without careful consideration. (Washington Post)

A federalappeals court reaffirmed the right of Myriad Genetics to patent two geneslinked to breast and ovarian cancer. (NY Times)

Judges wholearned that a convicted assailant was genetically predisposed to violenceimposed lighter sentences in a hypothetical case than they otherwise would have. (NY Times)