Conference Report: ‘Futures of Bioethics’ Postgraduate Bioethics Conference (PGBC) 2023

Report: Postgraduate Bioethics Conference 2023

With the generous support of the Institute of Medical Ethics, I attended the Postgraduate Bioethics Conference (PGBC) 2023 on 12-13 June 2023 in Edinburgh. The presentations addressed a wide range of important ethical issues arising from the biological and medical sciences from a diverse set of perspectives, including Law, Philosophy, History, Sociology, Anthropology, and the sciences. The conference theme was “the future of bioethics”, and this was reflected in delegates’ presentations. Some grappled with the ethical issues around technological innovation (such as artificial wombs), whilst others looked to the past for lessons for the future (on pandemics, for example). A number of delegates also considered potential solutions to current problems, such as anti-microbial resistance.

Another important theme was that of inclusion and diversity. Indeed, this was at the heart of a number of delegates’ presentations. Chioma Dibia, for example, used critical race theory to examine how proposed changes to the detention criteria in the Mental Health Act 1983 (from risk to significant harm) might impact black people. In the same session, Anne-Floor De Kanter addressed the problem of bias (concerning gender and race) related to medical devices. As part of this presentation, there was interesting discussion about how we understand inclusion – is it a bioethical principle stemming from social justice and/or equality, or a social practice? There was also a panel event organised by Black and Brown in Bioethics which addressed inclusion and diversity in UK bioethics itself. The panel focussed on activism and advocacy as a postgraduate, and the recording will be available to listen to as a podcast soon.

The session on Reproductive Ethics was perhaps the most relevant to my own research on abortion law in England and Wales. In particular, Megan Rosie O’Mahony outlined three potential impacts of ectogenesis on abortion law. I was particularly interested in Megan’s discussion on shared rights (genetic privacy and the right not to become a parent) and how one “parent” might be able to veto decisions about what should happen to the foetus in an artificial womb. I consider the role of the inseminator in abortion decision-making in my PhD and conclude, in this context, that he should not be able to veto the decision of the pregnant person. I also enjoyed attending sessions on subjects outside my own area as I felt it broadened my awareness of issues in contemporary bioethics. Indeed, I chaired a session on Neuroethics and learned a lot about consciousness, embodiment, and neurorights. It was also useful to gain experience in chairing sessions, as this is not something I had done before.

I also presented a paper in the Feminism and Femtech session arguing for the decriminalisation of abortion on the basis of two (connected) reasons. First, the pregnant person is best placed to make the abortion decision. This is because the decision to terminate a pregnancy is a hugely personal one that requires judgements to be made about a pregnant person’s social circumstances and the gravity of the abortion decision. Second, the absence of a specific legal right to make one’s own abortion decision fails to promote the pregnant person’s autonomy, which should be the primary principle in the context of abortion decision-making because the reasons why allowing patients to demand treatment is generally problematic (concern about limited resources and doctors being forced to act in conflict with their clinical judgement) do not apply here. My paper was more timely than I had anticipated, given the public and media interest in the sentencing of a woman who obtained abortion medication and terminated her pregnancy (32-24 weeks gestation) during the Covid-19 pandemic. This tragic case has led to calls for the decriminalisation of abortion from some. The discussion that followed my presentation offered much food for thought on how to further improve this work, as well as some ideas for new projects on abortion in the context of pregnant persons who lack capacity to make their own decisions and whether (and if so, how) doctors should raise abortion with patients.

There were three keynote presentations at the conference. First, Patricia Kingori spoke about ethical time, and the relationship between time, power, and ethics. I found Patricia’s critique of the “right” and “wrong” time, and limitation periods for bringing claims in private law, particularly interesting. I also learnt a lot from Patricia’s discussion on “colonial time”. Importantly, she stressed that the problem has not gone away merely because a considerable amount of time has passed. Next, Anne-Maree Farrell discussed the role of ethics in regulating sex technologies. I share Anne-Maree’s concerns about consent in this context, as well as her enthusiasm for interdisciplinary examination of the issue. Agomoni Ganguli-Mitra then closed the conference. Her presentation included a fascinating discussion of a new master’s level course she has designed and taught at the University of Edinburgh. The reading list highlights work by female academics and academics of colour in particular, and it empowers students to work with Agomoni to write the essay questions together. In my role as a lecturer, I am especially interested in assessment methods and I am looking to develop my module leadership skills, so this aspect of the presentation really stood out to me. Agomoni also warned that, in considering the future of bioethics, we must not overlook the important justice issues that need to be addressed right now.

PGBC is a conference primarily for postgraduate research students, so it was fantastic to have a panel event with Early Career Researchers on the “next step” in our careers as we look forward to our own futures as researchers. The panel addressed a range of issues, such as the work-life balance in academia and the transition between the PhD and post-doc stages. The panel offered practical advice, as well as words of wisdom and encouragement. Something that particularly resonated with me was Giulia Cavaliere’s reassurance that everyone (including very eminent academics!) has to deal with rejection sometimes. As a postgraduate research student, it was also great to connect with peers who are working on similar things and those who are at a similar stage in their careers. Indeed, the value of an academic network/community was a key takeaway of mine from the conference.

I would like to reiterate my thanks to the Institute of Medical Ethics for making it possible for me to attend PGBC 2023 with a Conference Grant.

Emily Ottley
Final Year PhD Student at the Dickson Poon School of Law, King’s College London