This essay argues that Catholic bioethicists and moral theologians need an expanded theology of technological or technical domination. It describes five variants of the concept: (1) domination of persons over others, (2) prideful assertion of mastery over nature, (3) ambition to usurp the will of God, (4) over-emphasis on technical solutions to human problems, and (5) an ideology of utility, efficiency, and effectiveness. It is argued, however, that a sixth variant is needed in regard to twenty-first century technologies. Dietrich von (...) Hildebrand’s observations of “the useful” can be employed to show how the instrumental rationality of technologies often gains a false motivational force. This preference for utility is encouraged by the complex, opaque, and autonomous structures of contemporary technologies. (shrink)

The preferential option for the poor is a concept and set of ideas in Catholic social teaching that is highly relevant to bioethics scholarship and practice. The option for the poor is mentioned frequently in the bioethics literature but with little specification of its history and implications for ethical and theological analysis. This article examines the origins and implications of the preferential option; compares it to critical race theory, which dominates current debates about discrimination and oppression; and proposes a set (...) of principles for further application in bioethical scholarship and discussion. (shrink)

Physically enhancing brain–machine interfaces communicate elec­tronically with the patient’s mind in both directions. They present significant opportunities to improve a patient’s health and to restore his or her physical function, but they also present problems for the patient’s sense of agency and self. This is exacerbated by notions of extension and enhancement that are not grounded in an authentic human anthropology that describes the inherently dignified person as an integral union of body and soul.

Eugenic thinking divides people into groups according to real or perceived genetic traits, identifies some groups as unwanted, and then promotes the elimination of the unwanted groups. Some American medical professionals are pursuing a eugenic agenda that pressures and misleads parents to abort unborn children with Down syndrome. These counselors have a strong, unwar­ranted bias that influences parents’ decisions significantly. The use of prenatal genetic testing and in vitro fertilization increases the number of deaths of unborn children with Down syndrome. (...) The widespread practice of identifying and aborting children with Down syndrome is properly called eugenics. (shrink)

Embryo adoption, when oriented to the rescue of a dignified human person, is a merciful and morally licit response to an evil consequence of in vitro fertilization and the freezing of embryos. Those who object to embryo adoption not only misconstrue the relevant moral reasoning but exhibit confusion among the object, intention, and circumstances and between two very different potential objects. Because the mercy and charity effected through embryo adoption are at the very heart of moral action, juridical arguments that (...) undermine people’s confidence in these priorities have far-reaching, harmful implications. (shrink)