Since 1994, our bioethics legislation has endeavored to propose benchmarks and rules of good practice to cautiously accompany the changes caused by advances in biomedical research. It had to be discussed and ensured that society could decide on acceptable innovations, according to solemnly affirmed criteria and rigorous conditions of supervision. Research ethics like scientific integrity and the social responsibilities of the researcher require this vigilance, this exercise of enlightened, pluralist consultation within a democratic framework. Until now, the regular revision of the law on bioethics allowed not only the monitoring of developments in scientific knowledge and capacities for intervention, but also the democratic arbitration of choices that condition the human future of our society. In 2018, everything seemed to be well under way in this regard with the organization of the States General on bioethics, the production of documented reports offering serious expertise. The revision mechanism was initially adjusted to a parliamentary calendar which will have imploded following economic events imposing other emergencies, before for also political reasons, it appeared imperative for the government to conclude as quickly as possible in the summer period. .

Read more on Figaro.fr

“data-reactid =” 27 “> To observe the conditions and (…) Read more on Figaro.fr

“The defenders of the bioethics bill have betrayed the legacy of the Enlightenment”
“How minorities impose rules from exceptions”
Unbolting of statues: “Our civilization is gradually emptying of its substance”
Michel De Jaeghere: “Damnation of memory”
Subscribe to the Figaro newsletter
“data-reactid =” 28 “>” The defenders of the bioethics bill have betrayed the legacy of the Enlightenment “
“How minorities impose rules from exceptions”
Unbolting of statues: “Our civilization is gradually emptying of its substance”
Michel De Jaeghere: “Damnation of memory”
Subscribe to the Figaro newsletter