Outline

Overview

This unit of study provides students with a foundational understanding of the methods employed in bioethical analysis and argumentation. This unit explores the meaning of 'bioethics' as a concept and practice, both historically and in contemporary discussions. The seminars introduce a diverse range of normative, argumentative, and empirical methods used in bioethics. We consider the relationship between scholarship, advocacy, and activism in bioethics, as well as epistemic justice, reflective equilibrium, and critical approaches to bioethics. We consider the role of theology and metaphysics in contemporary bioethical debate. Learning activities will include intensive workshops and small group discussions.

Unit details and rules

Academic unit	Public Health
Credit points	6
Prerequisites ?	None
Corequisites ?	None
Prohibitions ?	None
Assumed knowledge ?	None
Available to study abroad and exchange students	Yes

Teaching staff

Coordinator	Kathryn MacKay, kathryn.mackay@sydney.edu.au

Assessment

The census date for this unit availability is 1 September 2025

Details
Criteria

Type	Description	Weight	Due	Length	Use of AI
Out-of-class quiz	Seminar Quizzes Critical reflection quiz based on seminar readings and discussion.	25%	Multiple weeks	250 words	AI allowed
Outcomes assessed:
Written work	Short essay A short argumentative essay on a choice of topic.	30%	Week 06 Due date: 12 Sep 2025 at 23:59	1500 words, +/- 10%	AI allowed
Outcomes assessed:
Oral exam ?	Viva Voce A 20-minute oral examination covering the content of the unit of study.	45%	Week 12	20 minutes (oral)	AI prohibited
Outcomes assessed:

Assessment summary

Assessment criteria

The University awards common result grades, set out in the Coursework Policy 2014 (Schedule 1).

In BETH5000, Written Assessments are graded in accordance with the marking matrix used for all BETH Units of Study. A copy of this matrix is available in the Canvas site for this UoS.

Grading Table

Result Name	Mark Range	Description
HD	85-100	Awarded when the relevant learning outcomes for assessments are demonstrated at an exceptional standard.
DI	75-85	Awarded when the relevant learning outcomes for assessments are demonstrated at a very high standard.
CR	65-74	Awarded when the relevant learning outcomes for assessments are demonstrated at a good standard.
PA	50-64	Awarded when the relevant learning outcomes for assessments are demonstrated at an acceptable standard.
FA	0-49	Awarded when the relevant learning outcomes for assessments are not satisfactorily demonstrated.

For more information see guide to grades.

Use of generative artificial intelligence (AI)

You can use generative AI tools for open assessments. Restrictions on AI use apply to secure, supervised assessments used to confirm if students have met specific learning outcomes.

Refer to the assessment table above to see if AI is allowed, for assessments in this unit and check Canvas for full instructions on assessment tasks and AI use.

If you use AI, you must always acknowledge it. Misusing AI may lead to a breach of the Academic Integrity Policy.

Visit the Current Students website for more information on AI in assessments, including details on how to acknowledge its use.

Late submission

In accordance with University policy, these penalties apply when written work is submitted after 11:59pm on the due date:

Deduction of 5% of the maximum mark for each calendar day after the due date.
After ten calendar days late, a mark of zero will be awarded.

Academic integrity

The University expects students to act ethically and honestly and will treat all allegations of academic integrity breaches seriously.

Our website provides information on academic integrity and the resources available to all students. This includes advice on how to avoid common breaches of academic integrity. Ensure that you have completed the Academic Honesty Education Module (AHEM) which is mandatory for all commencing coursework students

Penalties for serious breaches can significantly impact your studies and your career after graduation. It is important that you speak with your unit coordinator if you need help with completing assessments.

Visit the Current Students website for more information on AI in assessments, including details on how to acknowledge its use.

Learning support

Simple extensions

If you encounter a problem submitting your work on time, you may be able to apply for an extension of five calendar days through a simple extension.  The application process will be different depending on the type of assessment and extensions cannot be granted for some assessment types like exams.

Special consideration

If exceptional circumstances mean you can’t complete an assessment, you need consideration for a longer period of time, or if you have essential commitments which impact your performance in an assessment, you may be eligible for special consideration or special arrangements.

Special consideration applications will not be affected by a simple extension application.

Using AI responsibly

Co-created with students, AI in Education includes lots of helpful examples of how students use generative AI tools to support their learning. It explains how generative AI works, the different tools available and how to use them responsibly and productively.

Support for students

The Support for Students Policy reflects the University’s commitment to supporting students in their academic journey and making the University safe for students. It is important that you read and understand this policy so that you are familiar with the range of support services available to you and understand how to engage with them.

The University uses email as its primary source of communication with students who need support under the Support for Students Policy. Make sure you check your University email regularly and respond to any communications received from the University.

Learning resources and detailed information about weekly assessment and learning activities can be accessed via Canvas. It is essential that you visit your unit of study Canvas site to ensure you are up to date with all of your tasks.

If you are having difficulties completing your studies, or are feeling unsure about your progress, we are here to help. You can access the support services offered by the University at any time:

Support and Services (including health and wellbeing services, financial support and learning support)
Course planning and administration
Meet with an Academic Adviser

Weekly schedule

WK	Topic	Learning activity	Learning outcomes
Multiple weeks	Topic varies by seminar.	Individual study (4 hr)

Attendance and class requirements

For each module, students are expected to:

Do the readings in preparation for the seminars.
Attend the seminars in person or remotely. They will be held biweekly on Mondays in weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, & 11, 14:00 - 18:00
- Location: F07 Carslaw Building, Level 3, Seminar Room 374
Be prepared with questions and comments, and engage actively in discussions during seminar.

Study commitment

Typically, there is a minimum expectation of 1.5-2 hours of student effort per week per credit point for units of study offered over a full semester. For a 6 credit point unit, this equates to roughly 120-150 hours of student effort in total.

Required readings

Six Really Good Papers
Singer, Peter. 1972. “Famine, Affluence, and Morality.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 1 (3): 229–43.

Foot, Philippa. 2002. “The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect.” In Virtues and Vices and Other Essays in Moral Philosophy, by Philippa. Foot, [New] ed., 1 (xvi, 213 p.). Oxford : Clarendon. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199252866.003.0002.

Overall, Christine. 2015. “Rethinking Abortion, Ectogenesis, and Fetal Death.” Journal of Social Philosophy 46 (1): 126–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/josp.12090.

Harris, John. 1975. “The Survival Lottery.” Philosophy (London) 50 (191): 81–87. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819100059118.

HALE, JACOB. 1996. “Are Lesbians Women?” Hypatia 11 (2): 94–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1996.tb00666.x.

Beecher, Henry K. 1966. “Ethics and Clinical Research.” The New England Journal of Medicine 274 (24): 1354–60. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM196606162742405.

First Things
McMillan, John. 2018. “What Is Bioethics?” In The Methods of Bioethics, by . Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199603756.003.0002.

ten Have, Henk A. M. J. 2022. “The Establishment of Bioethics.” In Bizarre Bioethics : Ghosts, Monsters, and Pilgrims , by H. ten Have, 1st ed., 15–37. Baltimore, Maryland : Johns Hopkins University Press.

Robin, Dominic. 2024. “Let the Foxes Run Free: Arresting Bioethics’ Inward Turn.” Bioethics 38 (8): 684–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13336.

Module 1: Philosophical Methods
Midgely, Mary. 1992. “Philosophical Plumbing.” Philosophy (London) 67 (SUPP33): 139–.

Hofmann, Bjørn, Jan Helge Solbakk, and Søren Holm. 2006. “Teaching Old Dogs New Tricks: The Role of Analogies in Bioethical Analysis and Argumentation Concerning New Technologies.” Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (5): 397–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-006-9018-5.

Walsh, Adrian. 2011. “A Moderate Defence of the Use of Thought Experiments in Applied Ethics.” Edited by Thomas Schramme, Mike McNamee, Mike McNamee, and Thomas Schramme. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (4): 467–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-010-9254-7.

Module 2 - Empirical Bioethics
Davies, Rachel, Jonathan Ives, and Michael Dunn. 2015. “A Systematic Review of Empirical Bioethics Methodologies.” BMC Medical Ethics 16 (1): 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-015-0010-3.

Ives, Jonathan, Michael Dunn, and Alan Cribb, eds. 2017. Empirical Bioethics : Theoretical and Practical Perspectives . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

“Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Practice.” 1996. In Justice and Justification: Reflective Equilibrium in Theory and Practice, by Norman Daniels, 333–53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Paton, Alexis. 2017. “No Longer “Handmaiden”: The Role of Social and Sociological Theory in Bioethics.” International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 10 (1): 30–49. https://doi.org/10.3138/ijfab.10.1.30.

Module 3: Epistemology
FRICKER, MIRANDA. 2003. “Epistemic Injustice and a Role for Virtue in the Politics of Knowing.” Metaphilosophy 34 (1/2): 154–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9973.00266.

Singh, Ilina. 2016. “Evidence, Epistemology and Empirical Bioethics.” In Empirical Bioethics, by , 67–83. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139939829.006.

Subramani, Supriya. 2025. “Practising Reflexivity: Ethico-Epistemological and Political Practice?” Methodological Innovations 18 (1): 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991251316584.

Module 4: Metaphysics and Theology
Degrazia, David. 1999. “Advance Directives, Dementia, and `the Someone Else Problem.” Bioethics 13 (5): 373–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8519.00166.

Kingma, Elselijn. 2018. “Lady Parts: The Metaphysics of Pregnancy.” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 82:165–87. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1358246118000115.

Campbell, Courtney S. 1990. “Religion and Moral Meaning in Bioethics.” The Hastings Center Report 20 (4): 4–10. https://doi.org/10.2307/3562777.

Fitzpatrick, Scott J., Ian H. Kerridge, Christopher F. C. Jordens, Laurie Zoloth, Christopher Tollefsen, Karma Lekshe Tsomo, Michael P. Jensen, Abdulaziz Sachedina, and Deepak Sarma. 2016. “Religious Perspectives on Human Suffering: Implications for Medicine and Bioethics.” Journal of Religion and Health 55 (1): 159–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-015-0014-9.

Module 5: Activists, Advocates, Academics
Lindemann, Hilde. 2019. “Bioethicists to the Barricades.” Bioethics 33 (8): 857–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12614.

Draper, Heather. 2019. “Activism, Bioethics and Academic Research.” Bioethics 33 (8): 861–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12574.

Shakespeare, Tom. 2019. “When the Political Becomes Personal: Reflecting on Disability Bioethics.” Bioethics 33 (8): 914–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12668.

A comprehensive reading list is provided via Canvas.

Learning outcomes

Learning outcomes are what students know, understand and are able to do on completion of a unit of study. They are aligned with the University's graduate qualities and are assessed as part of the curriculum.

Outcomes
Graduate qualities

At the completion of this unit, you should be able to:

LO1. Have developed and enhanced skills in the use of philosophical methods in bioethics, particularly the use of analysis and argumentation
LO2. Describe and critically reflect on the role of moral theory in bioethics
LO3. Articulate and critically engage with a range of methods and framings used in contemporary bioethics
LO4. Assess the legitimacy of various critical perspectives on ‘bioethics’ research and scholarship

Graduate qualities

The graduate qualities are the qualities and skills that all University of Sydney graduates must demonstrate on successful completion of an award course. As a future Sydney graduate, the set of qualities have been designed to equip you for the contemporary world.

GQ1	Depth of disciplinary expertise Deep disciplinary expertise is the ability to integrate and rigorously apply knowledge, understanding and skills of a recognised discipline defined by scholarly activity, as well as familiarity with evolving practice of the discipline.
GQ2	Critical thinking and problem solving Critical thinking and problem solving are the questioning of ideas, evidence and assumptions in order to propose and evaluate hypotheses or alternative arguments before formulating a conclusion or a solution to an identified problem.
GQ3	Oral and written communication Effective communication, in both oral and written form, is the clear exchange of meaning in a manner that is appropriate to audience and context.
GQ4	Information and digital literacy Information and digital literacy is the ability to locate, interpret, evaluate, manage, adapt, integrate, create and convey information using appropriate resources, tools and strategies.
GQ5	Inventiveness Generating novel ideas and solutions.
GQ6	Cultural competence Cultural Competence is the ability to actively, ethically, respectfully, and successfully engage across and between cultures. In the Australian context, this includes and celebrates Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, knowledge systems, and a mature understanding of contemporary issues.
GQ7	Interdisciplinary effectiveness Interdisciplinary effectiveness is the integration and synthesis of multiple viewpoints and practices, working effectively across disciplinary boundaries.
GQ8	Integrated professional, ethical, and personal identity An integrated professional, ethical and personal identity is understanding the interaction between one’s personal and professional selves in an ethical context.
GQ9	Influence Engaging others in a process, idea or vision.

Outcome map

Learning outcomes	Graduate qualities
Learning outcomes

Responding to student feedback

This section outlines changes made to this unit following staff and student reviews.

This Unit of Study has been updated significantly since the previous iteration. The module topics, assessments, and reading list have all been updated to reflect the new delivery mode, changes in the literature, and student feedback.

Additional information

Work, health and safety

No special issues are expected.

Disclaimer

The University reserves the right to amend units of study or no longer offer certain units, including where there are low enrolment numbers.

To help you understand common terms that we use at the University, we offer an online glossary.

Current students

Overview

Overview

Unit details and rules

Teaching staff

Assessment

Assessment

Assessment summary

Assessment criteria

Use of generative artificial intelligence (AI)

Late submission

Academic integrity

Learning support

Learning support

Simple extensions

Special consideration

Using AI responsibly

Support for students

Weekly schedule

Weekly schedule

Attendance and class requirements

Study commitment

Required readings

Learning outcomes

Learning outcomes

Graduate qualities

Outcome map

Responding to student feedback

Responding to student feedback

Additional information

Additional information

Work, health and safety

Disclaimer

On this page

Useful links

BETH5000: Methods in Bioethics

Semester 2, 2025 [Online] - Camperdown/Darlington, Sydney

Overview

Overview

Unit details and rules

Teaching staff

Assessment

Assessment

Assessment summary

Assessment criteria

Use of generative artificial intelligence (AI)

Late submission

Academic integrity

Learning support

Learning support

Simple extensions

Special consideration

Using AI responsibly

Support for students

Weekly schedule

Weekly schedule

Attendance and class requirements

Study commitment

Required readings

Learning outcomes

Learning outcomes

Graduate qualities

Outcome map

Responding to student feedback

Responding to student feedback

Additional information

Additional information

Work, health and safety

Disclaimer

On this page

Useful links