BBC ‘s Casualty programme on Saturday evening gave viewers a vote as to which of two patients should benefit from a donation. But it failed to tell us that we would not need to make so many life-and-death decisions if we got to grip with the chronic organ shortage. Being pussyfooting around in its approach to dead bodies, the Government is giving a kicking to some of the most vulnerable in our society. One depressing consequence of this is that a significant number of those on the waiting list take off to foreign countries to purchase an organ from a living third-world donor, something that is forbidden in the United Kingdom. The poor have no option but to wait in vain.
　　 The Human Tissue Authority’s position on the retention of body parts for medical research after a post-mortem examination is equally flawed. The new consent forms could have been drafted by some evil person seeking to stop the precious flow of human tissue into the pathological laboratory. The forms are so lengthy that doctors rarely have time to complete them and, even if they try, the wording is so graphic that relatives tend to leg it before signing. In consequence, the number of post mortems has fallen quickly.
　　 The wider worry is that the moral shortsightedness evident in the Human Tissue Act seems to infect every facet of the contemporary debate on medical ethics. Take the timid approach to embryonic stem cell research. The United States, for example, refuses government funding to scientists who wish to carry out potentially ground-breaking research on the surplus embryos created by IVF treatment.
　　 Senators profess to be worried that embryonic research fails to respect the dignity of “potential persons”. Rarely can such a vacuous concept have found its way into a debate claming to provide enlightenment. When is this “potential” supposed to kick in? In case you were wondering, these supposedly precious embryos are at the same stage of development as those that are routinely terminated by the Pill without anyone crying. Thankfully, the British Government has refused the position of the United States and operates one of the most liberal regimes in Europe, in which licences have been awarded to researchers to create embryos for medical research. It is possible that, in years to come, scientists will be able to grow organs in the lab and find cures for a range of debilitating diseases.
　　 The fundamental problem with our approach to ethics is our inability to separate emotion from policy. The only factor that should enter our moral and legal deliberations is that of welfare, a concept that is meaningless when applied to entities that lack self-consciousness. Never forget that the research that we are so reluctant to conduct upon embryos and dead bodies is routinely carried out on living, pain-sensitive animals.
　　 1. What has caused the chronic organ shortage?
　　 [A] a decrease in donation rates.
　　 [B] inefficient governmental policy.
　　 [C] illegal trade in human organs.
　　 [D] news media’s indifference.
　　 2. The expression “pussyfooting around” (Line 3, Paragraph 1) might mean______.
　　 [A] unfair
　　 [B] hesitant
　　 [C] secret
　　 [D] strict
　　 3. The moral shortsightedness is revealed in the fact that _____.
　　 [A] the government has stopped the experiment on human tissue
　　 [B] the donation consent forms are difficult to understand
　　 [C] the Human Tissues Act is an obstacle to important medical research
　　 [D] embryonic research shows disregard for human life
　　 4. To which of the following is the author most likely to agree?
　　 [A] the rich and the poor are equal in the face of death.
　　 [B] more scientists are needed for the medical advancement.
　　 [C] there is a double standard in medical ethics.
　　 [D] the dead deserve the same attention as the living.
　　 5. The author is most critical of_____.
　　 [A] the media
　　 [B] doctors
　　 [C] U. S. Legislators
　　 [D] the British government
　　 答案:1.B 2.B 3.C 4.C 5.C

　　 核心詞匯和超綱詞匯
　　 (1)get to grips with認(rèn)真處理
　　 (2)chronic(a.)慢性的，長期的，延續(xù)很長的
　　 (3)pussyfoot(v.)(about/around)謹(jǐn)慎的，顧慮重重的
　　 (4)approach (n.) 方式、方法、態(tài)度，如The school has decided to adopt a different ~ to discipline(學(xué)校決定采取另外一種方式解決紀(jì)律問題)
　　 (5)vulnerable(a.)易受攻擊的，脆弱的，敏感的
　　 (6)retention(n.)保留，保持;retain(v.)
　　 (7)leg it逃跑
　　 (8)purport(v.)自稱，標(biāo)榜;(n.)主要意思，大意，主旨
　　 (9)kick in開始生效(或見效)
　　 (10)regime(n.)統(tǒng)治方式，統(tǒng)治制度，政權(quán)，政體;組織方法，管理體制
　　 (11)deliberation(n.)熟思，考慮，商議
　　 全文翻譯
　　 英國廣播公司的“急診服務(wù)處”節(jié)目于周六晚上讓電視觀眾投票，決定兩個(gè)病人之中哪一個(gè)應(yīng)該受益于器官捐贈(zèng)。但是該節(jié)目沒有告訴我們?nèi)绻�認(rèn)真處理長期的器官缺乏問題，就沒有必要做那么多生死抉擇。政府對待尸體問題顧慮重重，給我們社會中比較弱勢的群體一個(gè)打擊。它造成的一個(gè)令人沮喪的后果是等待名單上很大一部分人飛到國外從第三世界捐贈(zèng)者那里購買活體器官，而這在英國是被禁止的。窮人除了徒然地等待之外別無選擇。
　　 人體組織局在驗(yàn)尸后保留身體部位用于醫(yī)學(xué)研究的觀點(diǎn)也同樣有缺陷。新的捐贈(zèng)同意書可能由某個(gè)懷有惡意、試圖阻止人體組織運(yùn)往病理化驗(yàn)所的人物起草。同意書如此冗長，以至于醫(yī)生很少有時(shí)間讀完它們，即便他們努力了，由于上面的措辭以圖表表示，因此當(dāng)事人的親戚往往在簽名之前逃跑了。結(jié)果驗(yàn)尸的數(shù)量驟然下降。
　　 更廣泛的憂慮是《人體組織法令》明顯的道德短視似乎全面影響了當(dāng)前的醫(yī)學(xué)倫理爭論。以小心翼翼的胚胎干細(xì)胞研究為例，美國政府拒絕為科學(xué)家提供基金，在由試管受精創(chuàng)造的剩余胚胎上進(jìn)行具有潛在的突破性的研究。
　　 一些參議員表示擔(dān)心胚胎研究未能尊重“潛在的人”的尊嚴(yán)。這樣一個(gè)空洞的概念很難設(shè)法進(jìn)入聲稱要提供啟示的爭論之中。什么時(shí)候這種“潛在”才能生效呢?免得你感到奇怪，這些想象上寶貴的胚胎與那些例行公事地被避孕丸扼殺卻沒有任何人哭泣的的生命處于同樣的發(fā)展階段。令人感激的是，英國政府已經(jīng)拒絕接受美國的立場并成立了一個(gè)歐洲比較自由的體制，在這里，研究者被授權(quán)為醫(yī)學(xué)研究制造胚胎。在未來的幾年科學(xué)家很由可能能夠在實(shí)驗(yàn)室中培育器官并找出一系列使人衰弱的疾病的治愈辦法。
　　 我們對待倫理的方法上存在的基本的問題是沒有能力把情感與政策分開，這表現(xiàn)在尸體和胚胎的神話上。唯一應(yīng)該進(jìn)入我們道德和法律的慎重考慮之中的因素是幸福。幸福是一個(gè)概念，當(dāng)它被運(yùn)用到缺乏自我意識的實(shí)體上的時(shí)候是沒有意義的。永遠(yuǎn)不要忘記我們?nèi)绱瞬辉高M(jìn)行的胚胎和尸體的研究正在一些活生生的、有疼痛知覺的動(dòng)物上照常實(shí)行。