Bioethics
IIS steps into the field of biomedical ethics
The Constituency Studies Unit at IIS focuses on contemporary issues facing the Jamat today. As part of their multifaceted research, Rafiq Ajani (Research Officer, IIS) and Dr Yaser Mirdamadi (Research Associate, IIS), along with Dr Hossein Dabbagh (Assistant Professor, Northeastern University, London), have recently published an Open Access paper in the Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. The paper outlines and critiques approaches to Muslim biomedical ethics, dividing them into three categories: textual, contextual and para-textual.
Why is this important for the Jamat?
A significant aspect of any faith practice is its jurisprudence, ethics, and morality. Over the centuries, Muslims have developed thousands of works on law and jurisprudence (fiqh) and ethics some of which have also been published by the IIS. One of the mandates of the AKDN and other Imamat institutions is to maintain a balance between faith and the world, as often articulated by His Highness, the Aga Khan.
These laws and frameworks do not exist in isolation. Laws operate in response to problems for which a relevant solution is developed. In the case of biomedical ethics, contemporary research and practice innovate incredibly quickly, often more quickly than legal scholarship (religious or secular) can keep up with.
At IIS, scholars have spent time considering the role that the “ethics of our faith” play in our contemporary medical decision-making, whether in research, practice, or reception. As in previous publications on ethics, this paper seeks to be descriptive, rather than prescriptive; it aims to provide the tools to solve problems rather than provide black-and-white solutions. That is why this paper is an analysis and critique of available literature, rather than a strict ethical guideline. We encourage readers to apply their intellect.
In what way? I think either go into this and provide some detail or leave this detail out. It begs questions.
What is the framework presented in the paper?
The researchers looked at modern-day, Muslim bioethical literature and categorized it not by what they were saying, but by how they reached their conclusions. They then looked at the benefits and potential hindrances of each methodology and were able to come up with a framework of methodologies of reasoning.
Importantly, the categories presented in this paper are not sectarian. Even within faith communities and schools of law, scholars can have different interpretations of the same text or research. The ethical conclusions the team drew from the literature that they examined came from two sources: religious scripture (the Qur’an and Sunna of the Prophet and Imams) and independent, normative deliberative processes (ʿaql). They then categorised the literature by how each methodology balanced the two sources.
Textual Approaches
This methodological approach heavily favours religious text: all moral and legal conclusions are embedded in the text and deliberation is only applied to the substance of the text. This methodology can be applied equally to the apparent (ẓahir) and hidden (baṭin) meaning of the text, so long as all conclusions are rooted completely in the religious text.
Contextual Approaches
Many ethical questions, particularly those relating to modern biomedical ethics, aren’t plainly addressed by the Qur’an and its related scripture. Contextual methodology considers legal, theological, philosophical, and social contexts to supplement ethical deliberation. This can often create new legal opinions (fatwas) that accommodate newer or modern medical research, practice, or even technology.
Paratextual Approaches
This approach gives equal weight to religious legal precedent (shariʿa) and independent moral reasoning in places where explicit permission and prohibition are absent from religious texts, or where there is reasonable disagreement. This largely builds on the contextual approach while allowing for a wider range of sources for moral deliberation.
Where do we go from here?
Not only does this paper provide more detailed information about the various approaches, but it also includes nuanced critiques and practical examples of each. This is the first publication in an ongoing research endeavour specifically in the field of Muslim bioethics. Future publications will build on this framework to provide a detailed understanding of the legal and ethical landscape, today. Importantly, the paper is Open Access, which means it can be read by anyone without needing a subscription to the journal.