Biotechnology and the Human Good

FOUR: Biotechnology and Human Dignity

C H A P T E R F O U R Biotechnology and Human Dignity Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world. —United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights FEW terms or ideas are more central to bioethics—or less clearly defined —than human dignity.1 People invoke it to support almost anything . So it is a standard to which most people are quite receptive. But understanding how people use it, and how a Christian perspective on it can help clarify its meaning and implications, constitutes one of the greatest challenges and opportunities in bioethics today. Particularly in the face of emerging biotechnologies, we need a clear anthropology—a clear understanding of who human beings are and, by implication, how they may and may not act toward one another and the world. Clarifying what human dignity is all about is a wonderful vehicle for developing such understanding, in part because the concept is so important to so many—nonreligious and religious people alike. Respect for human dignity is an ethical mandate to which both sides of many bioethical debates appeal. For example, the state of Oregon legalized physician-assisted suicide by passing the Death with Dignity Act, but opponents claimed that legalizing the practice would instead undermine the dignity of elderly, disabled, and dying patients. Similarly, opposing claims are made in response to assertions that respect for the dignity of these same patients demands pursuing cures by producing embryos for embryonic stem cell research via cloning: Producing Biotechnology and Human Dignity 59 human beings in embryonic form and destroying them for the benefit of others is an affront to human dignity. The term ‘‘human dignity’’ is also surfacing more frequently in significant bioethics and other public documents such as national constitutions and international bioethics agreements. It has played a role in the constitutions of a politically diverse array of countries, including Afghanistan , Brazil, Canada, Costa Rica, the former Federal Republic of Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Ireland, Italy, Nicaragua, Peru, Portugal , South Korea, Spain, Sweden, and Turkey. In some of these countries , such as Germany, the role of human dignity is quite substantial. Affirming that ‘‘the dignity of the human being is inviolable,’’ the German Constitution recognizes various human rights that the law must respect.2 Even in countries where the term has not been influential in constitutional language, it has come to play an important role. For example , the U.S. Supreme Court has employed the term in its deliberations over the meaning of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth amendments to the Constitution. International documents that are relevant to issues in bioethics similarly have affirmed the critical importance of human dignity. The United Nations, whose very charter celebrates the ‘‘inherent dignity’’ of ‘‘all members of the human family,’’ issued a Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 with a preamble containing the same language .3 The Universal Declaration’s Article 1 more specifically affirms that ‘‘all human beings’’ are born ‘‘equal in dignity.’’ Two other documents —the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights— joined this document in 1966 to constitute the so-called International Bill of Rights. All three documents ground the various rights of all human beings in their human dignity. In line with this outlook, the Council of Europe’s 1996 Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine was designed explicitly to ‘‘protect the dignity’’ of ‘‘all human beings.’’4 These documents reflect the primary sense in which human dignity is invoked today: as an attribute of all human beings equally that establishes their great significance or worth. The word dignity comes from the Latin words dignitas (‘‘worth’’) and dignus (‘‘worthy’’), suggesting 60 C H A P T E R F O U R that dignity points to some standard by which people should be viewed and treated. Though the standard usually has an egalitarian bent to it today, in the world of ancient Greece and Rome the standard more commonly was attached to inegalitarian traits, such as physical prowess and intellectual wisdom—as exemplified in such figures as Hercules and Socrates. People differed in dignity according to the degree to which they manifested the relevant traits, and the honor due them varied accordingly . This sense of dignity persists today when...