Every day, people across the world face situations where they need to make a decision. More often than not, no choice that is available will be perfect. Instead, there is a need to balance trade-offs and prioritise what matters most.
If you are a policymaker, the decisions you face can be monumental. Developments in biomedical technologies may offer you, in part, a way to tackle some of the most pressing health and wider societal issues in the world today. Yet in doing so, they will often raise profound risks and benefits for the people, communities and populations that need support.
Ethical challenges thrive in the world of complexity, where there is no obvious right and wrong. Becoming aware of these and being unafraid to explore and discuss them can help ensure policies reflect public values, that regulation is proportionate and diverse interests are balanced. In short, being ethically aware helps policymakers get closer to making choices that result in a better and more equitable experience for all. Why then, is ethical evidence so often overlooked?
I believe a main reason is an assumption of lengthy ethical considerations being a block to scientific progress. While is it true that ethical assessment takes time, I would argue this is an investment and, when well utilised, ethics is an enabler of innovation. A clear example of this can be found in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority – the regulator of assisted reproduction and research on human gametes and human embryos. It is the proportionate, ethically informed regulation the HFEA provides that helps the UK to attract some of the most talented scientists.
"Any government wanting to harness the potential of science and technology will need to anticipate and respond to the ethical challenges presented by them"
The ethical and regulatory challenges associated with developments in biomedicine, health and AI are set to intensify. Indeed, we are increasingly seeing situations where science has outpaced regulation. Any government wanting to harness the potential of science and technology will need to anticipate and respond to the ethical challenges presented by them. And I believe the bioethics sector, including organisations such as the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, must step forward to help better equip policymakers with the tools they need to navigate this complex ethical terrain successfully.
To achieve this, we are enhancing our ability to anticipate disruptive developments and technologies. This will ensure we have a strong grasp on acute issues so we can give policymakers the advice they need now, as well as an understanding of what is coming, so we can present them with information they are not yet aware of but would benefit to be. This is how ethical considerations can become part of a short- and longer-term view. Indeed, this is how ethics will become both an agenda response and an agenda setting item.
Another component of the answer resides in how we present ethical advice. By embracing a new, modular approach to research where we break down large topics into a series of questions and then publish our advice one question at a time, I believe we will deliver robust evidence in a more succinct and timely way.
And finally, we must better connect civil servants and government with the UK bioethics sector. For by having a joined-up network of active bioethicists’ and our nation’s decision makers, we will support ethical counsel being more easily accessed and utilised as an integral part of the policy development process. This is what will ensure we are in a stronger position to codesign future-proofed solutions. And it is only by working effectively together that we will be able to place ethics at the centre of decisions about biomedicine and health, so we all benefit.
Danielle Hamm is director of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics