The trouble with academic papers


In recent days there have been headlines across our newspapers such as this "Abortion outrage: Mums should be allowed to terminate newborns, say Australian academics" (link).  This is a sickening and tragic and has made many people angry.  I can even see some of my readers horrified by this headline and not wanting to read any further. I completely understand. 


But the true is, the controversial paper that is being discussed is a theoretical academic paper written by Alberto Giubilini, (University of Milan and Monash University) and Francesca Minerva (University of Melbourne and Oxford University) and published by the British Medical Journal and does not propose that this should happen, it is simply theoretical. 


The academics argues that as abortions are allow in most countries why not the termination of a new born baby that would have been aborted if doctors and parents knew the full extent of the disability?  It raises the whole question of abortion. 


The ideas raised in the paper should and would make anyone have a reaction and you and I know and believe that this is morally wrong, but my question is - should academics have the right to write controversial theoretical papers such as this? This, and probably many others have been written, but generally remain in the domain of scientific/academic community and we never hear about them. In this current day of "freedom of speech", are researcher entitled to consider these issues?  Or is it just too dangerous to have these issues out in the public in case someone in power picks up the idea and things it is good.


I'm not defending the paper (the idea makes me sick in the stomach), I'm asking the question of academics debate - and what is considered "unacceptable" or going "too far" in this modern age.  Does this paper cross the line?  According to Francesca Minerva This was a theoretical and academic article,'' she said. ''I didn't mean to change any laws. I'm not in favour of infanticide. I'm just using logical arguments. The paper had been taken out of context, she said. It was intended for an academic community.  'This debate is not new. The debate has been going on for 30 years,'' she said. ''I don't think people outside bioethics should learn anything from this paper.'' (link)


A heavy topic for a Saturday but one that I have been pondering since I read the newspaper article yesterday and seen posts on various blogs. 

Comments

  1. As you know I am pro-life. Unfortunately many pro-life organisations grab hold of something like this and twist it to serve their agenda. It helps to take whatever the media tell us with a pinch of salt. Academics must be scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to fresh theoretical papers and essays. Nothing like a controversial topic like abortion to get them acclaim- even if it is in a deceptive way! Blessings!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Considering this isn't new - they must be scrapping the bottom of the barrel! Interestedly ethics research has two camps - Christian ethics who openly announce their believes and fight for ethic decisions based on the Bible, then there are ethics researchers who are not Christian and base their ethics on logic - think these two belong to the latter group.

      Delete
  2. The sad thing is that what is theory in this decade may become a reality some time in the future. Once abortion was seen as abhorant, now in many circles and circumstance acceptable. Infantacide has happened before and will again. Too sad to contemplate. The medical can and will discuss these things among themselves, but however hypothetical, there will be those who will think this way.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think Academia has the right to informed theoretical debate. Unfortunately infanticide is not new & is practised today in many countries where a male is more valued than a female & any deformity means a child cannot contribute to the family income & is thus seen as a liability & life disposable. Sadly we cannot be trusted to behave ethicly even when we are sure of what is right. People are far more likely to behave selfishly ~ & the infanticide or abortion of our unwanted strikes at the root of our selfishness. As a Man thinks in his heart, so is he, states the bible. We need to be careful what we think; we are liable to act on it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ganeida - humans are very capable of doing this and you are spot on, we do need to be careful what we think and make public. This really made me think about academic research - whilst we don't want to restrict thought and ideas, we need to be careful how it is handled.

      Delete
    2. Yes. You are both right! Good points.

      Delete
  4. In ancient Greece, specifically Sparta, infanticide was practiced -- it's certainly not a new thing. I agree with their logic, and if people are appalled (as they should be), then maybe they should reconsider abortion. Unfortunately, for all they say, mankind is not logical, just selfish.
    Nick

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with Nick. I think it is very abhorrent to think about or write about in any way, but it is absolutely no worse than killing a baby in the womb. Murder, no matter which way you look at it. Perhaps killing the baby after it is born appears somewhat more coldhearted, deliberate and repungent though - babies are so innocent and beautiful, how can anyone consider killing them??! :(

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment