Bioethical Transparency and Vegetarianism: Report as a Member of the Board of Directors of the
International Association of Bioethics (IAB) and of the Asian Bioethics
Association (ABA).
- Frank J. Leavitt, Ph.D.
Chairman, The Centre for International Bioethics
Faculty of Health Sciences
Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
Fax: + 972-8-6477633
E-mail: yeruham@bgumail.bgu.ac.il
Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 12 (2002), 212-4.
At the 1998 meeting of the Asian Bioethics Association
(ABA), in Tokyo, I was nominated as Vice President for West Asia.I do not know why I never thought to
write a report to our members. I
apologize for this shortcoming of mine..
Now that I have been re-elected a Vice President of ABA at the 2002 meeting
in Seoul, In mid-2001 I was elected to the Board of the International
Association of Bioethics (IAB). I
owe it to those who put faith in me by electing me, that I should write a
report. So I will combine reports of
my involvement in both organizations in this document.
I attended the founding meeting of the East Asian
Association of Bioethics (EAAB) in Beijing in 1995. At the 1997 Asian Bioethics Conference in Kobe, the EAAB
became the Asian Bioethics Association (ABA), covering all of Asia, from Japan
in the East to Israel and Turkey in the West of Asia. I recall joking with some of the feminist founding members
about the fact that ABA in Hebrew,
means father.
Credit for pioneering the idea of Asian Bioethics goes
to a number of persons, especially Prof Hyakundai Sakamoto, of Nihon University
in Tokyo, who talked about the idea as early as the IAB Congress in San
Francisco (IAB3), in 1996.
Encouraging Asian Bioethics is intended to be an antidote to the
Western, and perhaps especially American hegemony in bioethics.(I comment below, on the phenomenon of
the IAB's becoming self-perpetuatingly Western.) It is actually incredible that
a country, USA, where in the 21st Century, they still have a medical system in
which the treatment one gets depends on one's ability to pay, should be looked
upon as a model for medical
ethics. But just forming an ABA is not a sufficient remedy, as I shall
remark in my comments on the recent Seoul meeting.
My work
for Asian bioethics has primarily been as Associate Editor of this Journal, EJAIB . As
readers know, our policy has always been to encourage Asian bioethicists to
submit articles and discussion. The Mystical Bioethics Network column, edited
by Erin Williams and myself, moreover, seems to have almost exclusively Asian
contributors.
The ABA has just held its 2002 conference in Seoul,
Korea, organized by Prof. Song Sang-Yong of Hallym University. The spirit in
Seoul was entirely different from that at the IAB conference just a couple of
weeks before in Brasilia. Although both conferences were efficiently organized
and beautifully hosted, the ABA
conference was smaller, with more of a family atmosphere.Everyone was accessible for questions,
debate and discussion. There was
no lack of professionalism, but it was
not forced and competitive as in the West. There was a genuineatmosphere of seeking truth together,
without paying too much attention to
how we sound, or to whether what we say will help us professionally.
The only
criticism I have is that some of the papers gave the impression that the
purpose of Asian bioethics is to see how
much Western ethics we can import into Asia. This is surely not
what Prof Sakamoto intended. I
think there is too much of a tendency to judge Asian medical systems according
to the extent to which they put
into effect American principles.
Asian bioethicists need not be
bashful about the contributions which Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Shinto,
Jainism, and I almost forgot to mention Judaism, can make to bioethics.To give one example, instead of
criticizing Israelis and Japanese for reluctance to donate organs, we should
try to understand more deeply those aspects of Judaism and Shinto which tend to
conflict with defining death as brain death. It was always a little incongruous
that I, an Israeli, should have
been Vice President for West Asia.
West Asia is overwhelmingly Muslim, and we Jews are a tiny minority.
Therefore, along with a series of new positions, the position of Vice President
for Asian Ethnic and Religious Minorities was formed. These include Jews,
Dalits, Druze, Sikhs, Jains, Kurds, Zoroastrians, and many others. I would like
to do all I can to help these minorities acquire more of a voice in Asian Bioethics.I will welcome suggestions as to howthis can best be accomplished.
I have decided to publish my Report on my year on the
IAB board here as well, because I assume that most of those who voted for me
are members of the Eubios family, and because the EJAIB editor, Darryl Macer, also a member ofIAB Board also felt that I should be
transparent. I'll begin with some matters having to do with our everyday work
on the Board, and then I'll move
to some larger issues having to do with vegetarianism, a global conference
month, Western bias, and bioethical transparency.
I see my own function as doing whatever I can to try to
promote ethical life and health sciences, and indeed ethical life itself. Most
of the Board's work, so far as it seems to me, has to do with planning and
carrying out conferences. This is
legitimate insofar as such
conferences lead to discussions and personal relations which advance the cause
of ethics and deeper thought about the meaning of life.Three kinds of conferences are
involved: IAB World Congresses
held at different venues every two years; and smaller, more local conferences,
in which the Board participates, held in various venues on alternate years to
the Congresses; and other conferences, which are not organized by the IAB, to
which the Board gives its endorsement. There is a policy that local organizers
of conferences of the first two
kinds pay the travel and local expenses of Board members(unless they can and will do so
themselves), to attend the conferences.
Board members are expected to assist in various aspects of planningand organization, to give major
lectures and to chair sessions. It
is assumed, correctly or not (!), that members of the IAB Board of Directors
are particularly distinguished bioethicists who will significantly add to the
quality of a conference. This policy was not widely known to all IAB members
until this year. But at the 2002
meeting in Brasilia, the Board explained it to those members who attended, in
the interest of transparency. It
should be noted that although the Board carries on most of its work by email,
we cannot work properly unless we meet in person at least once a year. Nor can
all Board members pay their own expenses to attend these meetings.So the policy seems to be justified
because it allows these annual meetings to take place. If the policy did not
exist, then only people who can afford to pay their own travel and expenses to
often far-away conferences, could stand for election to the Board. This would
result in a kind of affluence bias.
It was understood that a condition of the Board's
endorsing conferences of the third sort, be that the conferences must be open
to all members of the IAB. The
Board endorsed a conference in the United Arab Emirates this year.I enquired as to how I might obtain a
visa to attend this conference, since the UAE has no embassy orconsulate in my country, Israel.In spite of repeated emails on my part,
I received no cooperation from the organizers of the UAE conference.At the same time, another member of our
Board, Hasna Begum, from Bangladesh, was unable to obtain a visa to attend our
2001 meeting in Massa, Italy. And complications, which also involved visaproblems, made it also impossible for
her to attend the 2002 meeting in Brasilia. I therefore proposed to the Board a resolution which would make
all endorsement of conferences contingent upon the organizers' undertaking to
make all effort to help all delegates obtain visas to enter the host
country. My proposal requires
"making all effort", but does not necessarily require that they be
successful. My reasoning is that
we should not absolutely outlaw IAB meetings in countrieswhich have un-bioethical policies,
because such meetings might engender some discussion which might be an
influence for positive change. We
did not have time to discuss my proposal at the Brasilia meeting, but we agreed
to deal with it by email, or at the next meeting of the Board.
I have to confess that at the 2001 meeting in Massa,
Italy, there was a misunderstanding, and I lectured on a subject other than
what had been expected. I
apologize publicly, even though it was in my opinion a legitimate misunderstanding.
To go into details would be tedious for the reader. But I ought to remark that it is a shame that I was not even
informed of this error until a friend mentioned it to meover dinner after the 2002 meeting in
Brasilia. I think that as
bioethicists we should be more open about questioning and criticizing each
other. How else can be improve? I wish to inform all Eubios readers, just as I
inform my students, that I am always happy to receive criticism of all kinds at
any time. No one need ever be worried
about insulting me. Standing on
honour, and getting insulted at honest criticism, is an un-bioethical trait. I
am not going to trouble the reader with all details of the work of the Board,
but I am always happy to answer any questions by email.I shall devote the rest of this report
to some of the larger issues.
Food for vegetarians and others with specialrequirements: The two meetings which I have attended so far as a
Board member, Massa (2001) and
Brasilia (2002), had food and accommodation of the highest standard, but no special provision was made for people with special dietary needs. The growing international interest in
vegetarianism, whether for reasons of ethics or of health, suggests that within
the bioethics profession - perhaps more than any other profession - provision
ought to be made for strictly vegetarian food. This does not mean picking among
the pieces of meat to look for some vegetables. It means balanced, fully
nutritional, satisfying
meals. A conference which
serves strict vegetarian food can also satisfy people with religious dietary restrictions.Some people object to making special
provision for religion. But it is
in the interest of every conference to make it possible and pleasant for all to
attend, if only for financial reasons.
Hindu Brahmins are strictly vegetarian to the extent that the more
serious among them will not eat food from a kitchen where meat dishes are also
prepared. It should be noted that
"strict vegetarian" for Hindus allows milk (although usually not eggs or
fish). But a strictly vegetarian
Hindu will also eat "vegan" food which has no animal products whatsoever. A
conference which can guarantee the availability of food strict enough to
satisfy a Hindu Brahmin should have no trouble getting a certificate of kashrut
(kosher food) from an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, provided that any milk involved be
certifiably from cow, goat, sheep or buffalo. And food which is acceptable to Orthodox Jews will also be
acceptable to religious Muslims. So making certifiably strict vegetarian food
available at a conference should really enhance both the incomeand the pluralism of any conference, by
facilitating the attendance of more Hindu Brahmins, Orthodox Jews, religious
Muslims, and people who are vegetarian for other reasons.Should conference organizers have
questions, I can help put them in touch with the proper rabbinical authorities
(although I am not a rabbi myself), as well as with knowledgeable Muslims and
Brahmins.
Global conference month: A problem for anyone attending any international
professional meetings is the frequent conflict with one's academic year.It is unfair to students to cancel and
reschedule classes. Although
students should understand that we
have to attend conferences and participate in international discussions in
order to have something to teach them, we should nevertheless try to make the
academic year as easy as possible for our students. . Although universities in different parts ofthe world have different calendars. I
suggest that international professional bodies, starting with the IAB and ABA,
try to reach a global agreement on an International Conference Month, during
which all scientific and academic conferences will be held, and which will
interfere as little as possible with academic years around the world..
Western bias:Darryl will be publishing something in
more detail on the geographical statistics on IAB membership. But I can say,
the policy considerations lean clearly westwards. The American Thanksgiving (a Christian religious holiday) is
taken into consideration when planning conference dates.I do not think a conference would be
scheduled to conflict with the Jewish Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement).When I point out that other peoples and
faiths also have their needs, my suggestions are passed over on the grounds
that American attendance is particularly important for reasons of numbers and
registration fees. I do not think
I am being unfair to suggest that the IAB is becoming self-perpetuatingly
Western. This does not mean that we should not support the IAB.But we should seek ways to promote more
Asian and African and other non-Western membership, and representation on the
Board. At the same time, it is
particularly important to encourage the Asian Bioethics Association, not for
reasons of antagonism but in the hope that we shall eventually reach unity and
harmony.
Bioethical transparency: Our meetings in Massa and Brasilia were beautiful in
every way, and the organizers devoted heart and soul to making it a perfect
experience for all of us. I trust
that our Massa, Brasilia, and other conference hosts will understand,
therefore, that no offense is intended when I raise the question whether such
ideal venues, and beautiful experiences for the delegates, are the only and
best way to serve bioethics. Every
country I know of can be proud of
its unique, delicious food, but must also admit that it has residents who
cannot afford to eat it. Every
country has beautiful hotels and resorts, as well as homeless people living on
the streets. Every country has beautiful nature spots, as well as places of
environmental embarrassment. Every country has policies, aswell as people who fiercely criticize
these policies. In my opinion, the
interests of bioethics might be better served if conference organizers were to
do more to facilitate the exposure of delegates to the "other" sides
of the country of venue: the poor,
the dissatisfied, the opponents of the regime, the environmental catastrophes,
etc.
I do not want the reader to think I am putting myself
forward as a good example. But
perhaps I can best illustrate what I mean by giving an example from my own
experience. Some years ago, a
Japanese researcher came to Israel for a conference, and spent about a week
with us. On her last day with us,
while walking together, I saw a
memorial notice, for a neighbor who had been killed by a terrorist.I translated the Hebrew and explained
to her. She remarked that during
her entire time with us, I only showed her the Jewish side of the
conflict. She asked why I did not
show her the Muslim side as well.
At first I thought I was quite right in what I had done.I was not running a conference at the
time, but was merely a private host.
But upon more reflection, I began to think that perhaps the cause of
truth would be served better if all sides were to be given a hearing. If you
really believe in what you are doing, then why not help peoplesee all sides, and come to their own
conclusions? If you are on the
side of truth, then their agreement with you will be even stronger than if you
had shown them a one-sided picture.
A few years later, I became a partner with Darryl Macer
and Jayapaul Azariah, in a Japanese Ministry of Education, Sport and Culture
Research Grant to develop an Asian Bioethics Network that included conducting
bioethics seminars in Japan, India, Israel and Turkey. This was at the time
which used to he called the "Middle
Eastern Peace Process".
I did not believe in this "Peace Process" from thevery start, and I think that history
has already shown it to have been very disappointing. I do not think that
peace, itself, is a ridiculous
goal. But I think that this was a
ridiculous way of trying to achieve it.
I was then, as I am now, a committed Israeli Jew.But I did believe that neighbors,
whether at war or at peace, ought to cooperate together in matters of public
and environmental health. It
seemed to me to be a bioethical cause, to foster such cooperation on something
that affects all of us. I saw the
possibility of contacts with the Palestinian Authority as perhaps opening the
doors for more cooperation of this sort.
I also believed that Darryl and Jay and other
international guests to the bioethics seminars which Iconducted in Beer Sheva, ought to be
helped to see all sides of the issues and to let truth be their guide. I
therefore initiated and helped facilitate meetings, in which Darryl and
Jayapaul participated, with representatives of the Palestinian Authority, as
well as individual Muslims. I brought
representatives of the Palestinian Ministry of the Environment to a bioethics
seminar in Beer Sheva. Darryl,
Nobuko, Jay and I traveled, on our first visit to Gaza City, in a Palestinian
Police jeep, going at about 130kph on crowded city streets guarded with
Kalashnikov rifles, because they feared for the safety of their guests and to
be shot at for carrying a Jew in the jeep. On another occasion, I took them in my car to a bioethics
meeting at a Muslim home in Bet
Umar -- between Hevron and Bet Lechem.
Our hosts were concerned
that their neighbors might attack because I, an Israeli Jew, was visiting.I was glad I was driving a Citroen, an
automobile famous for its ability to take corners at high speed.Our hosts opened the iron gate to their
courtyard as we approached. I
turned in quickly, and they shut the gate just as quickly. Perhaps someday Darryl and Jay and I will tell the
whole story of those exciting times. Meanwhile, I just wanted to give a taste,
in order to indicate the extent to which one must go if one is serious about
bioethical transparency of the kind which might even result in some mutual
human understanding in the long run. One risks having one's guests told things
which totally disagree with what one believes oneself.One might also risk one's skin, to no
little extent. But I think it is
worth it. We are trying to make
the world a little better, aren't we?
I hope that bioethics conference hosts in other
countries will also consider making a little more effort to expose their
guests, or at least those guests who are interested, to the "other"
sides of their countries. If we
believe in truth, then we have no reason to fear it.
In conclusion, I can only say what I believe to be
true. Whether this is popular on the IAB Board or not, I intend to continue to
voice my suggestions. Whether my
approach is appropriate to the IAB Board will, of course, be decided upon when
I come up for re-election about three years from now.
Go back to EJAIB 12 (6) November 2002
Go back to EJAIB
The Eubios Ethics Institute is on the world wide web of Internet:
http://eubios.info/index.html