Faculty Bibliography

Organ transplantation is limited due to the scarcity of donor organs. In order to expand the supply of organs for transplantation, interspecies chimeras have been examined as a potential future source of humanized organs. Recent studies using gene editing technologies in combination with somatic cell nuclear transfer technology and hiPSCs successfully engineered humanized skeletal muscle in the porcine embryo. As these technologies progress, there are ethical issues that warrant consideration and dialogue.

The typical Western diet, high in processed and animal-based foods, is nutritionally and ethically problematic. Beyond the well-documented cruelty to animals that characterizes the practices of the factory-farming industry, current patterns of meat consumption contribute to medical and moral harm in humans on both an individual level and a public health scale. We aim to deconstruct, by highlighting their fallacies, the common positive and normative arguments that are used to defend current nutritional patterns. Animal-based foods promote the mechanisms that underlie chronic cardiometabolic disease, whereas whole-food plant-based nutrition can reverse them. Factory farming of animals also contributes to climate change, antibiotic resistance, and the spread of infectious diseases. Finally, the current allocation of nutritional resources in the United States is unjust. A societal shift toward more whole-food plant-based patterns of eating stands to provide significant health benefits and ethical advantages, and the medical profession has a duty to advocate accordingly. Although it remains important for individuals to make better food choices to promote their own health, personal responsibility is predicated on sound advice and on resource equity, including the availability of healthy options. Nutrition equity is a moral imperative and should be a top priority in the promotion of public health.

BACKGROUND:Offering fertility preservation (FP) prior to gonadotoxic therapy, including cancer care and gender-affirming treatment, is now considered standard of care. Periodically, parents and children disagree about whether to pursue FP. However, it is unknown how often this occurs and how disagreement is handled when it arises. Moreover, there is no clear guidance on how to resolve these difficult situations. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of available research evidence about parent-child disagreement regarding FP in order to establish that disagreement occurs in practice, understand the basis for disagreement and explore suggestions for how such disputes could be resolved. Based on our findings, we offer a discussion of the ethical principles at stake when disagreement occurs, which can be used to guide clinicians' approaches when these challenging scenarios present. SEARCH METHODS/METHODS:A comprehensive literature search was run in several databases, including PubMed/Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The search was performed in February 2021 and updated in August 2021. Articles were included in the final review if they discussed how parents or children wanted their views on FP taken into account, presented evidence that parent-child discordance regarding FP exists, discussed how to handle disagreement in a particular case or offered general suggestions for how to approach parent-child discordance about FP. Studies were excluded if the patients were adult only (age 18 years and older), pertained to fertility-sparing treatments (e.g. gonad shielding, gonadopexy) rather than fertility-preserving treatments (e.g. testicular tissue cryopreservation, ovarian tissue cryopreservation, oocyte cryopreservation or sperm cryopreservation) or explored the views of clinicians but not patients or parents. Meta-synthesis was used to synthesize and interpret data across included studies and thematic analysis was used to identify common patterns and themes. OUTCOMES/RESULTS:In total, 755 publications were screened, 118 studies underwent full-text review and 35 studies were included in the final review. Of these studies, 7 discussed how parents or children wanted their opinions to be incorporated, 11 presented evidence that discordance exists between parents and children regarding FP, 4 discussed how disagreement was handled in a particular case and 21 offered general suggestions for how to approach parent-child disagreement. There was a range of study designs, including quantitative and qualitative studies, case studies, ethical analyses and commentaries. From the thematic analysis, four general themes regarding FP disagreement emerged, and four themes relating to the ethical principles at stake in parent-child disagreement were identified. The general themes were: adolescents typically desire to participate in FP decision-making; some parents prefer not to involve their children; minors may feel more favorably about FP than their parents; and transgender minors and their parents may have unique reasons for disagreement. The ethical principles that were identified were: minor's best interest; right to an open future; minor's autonomy; and parental autonomy. WIDER IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:This study offers an overview of available research on the topic of parent-child disagreement regarding FP and discusses the ethical considerations at stake when disagreement occurs. The findings can be used to inform guidance for clinicians presented with FP disagreement in practice.