260402 research outputs found
Sort by
Moral Space Through Professional Solidarity
No full textCréer un espace moral implique des actions et des omissions. Une omission importante en matière de solidarité consiste à refuser d’organiser ou d’assister à des congrès professionnelles dans des pays et des États américains où les lois et l’approbation sociale rendent la participation inconfortable, imprudente ou dangereuse pour certains membres de la communauté professionnelle. Le principe du sacrifice inadmissible de Markowitz, qu’elle a utilisé pour critiquer les politiques en matière d’avortement, est utilisé pour montrer pourquoi il est erroné d’organiser une conférence professionnelle dans un tel État et pourquoi la solidarité nécessite le soutien de toutes les personnes morales. Si cet article décrit l’importance de ce principe aujourd’hui en ce qui concerne les personnes LGBTQ+, il pourrait également s’appliquer bientôt, voire dès maintenant, aux personnes de couleur, aux femmes ou aux citoyens non américains en visite. Il montre également pourquoi la solidarité contre les sacrifices inadmissibles est un meilleur moyen de fonder les décisions concernant le lieu ou la participation à des congrès qu’un argument téléologique sur les boycotts visant à changer les politiques.Creating moral space involves actions and omissions. An important omission of solidarity is to refuse to hold or attend professional conferences in countries and American states where laws and social approbation make it uncomfortable, unwise, or dangerous for certain members of the professional community to attend. Markowitz’s Impermissible Sacrifice Principle, which she used to critique abortion policies, is employed to show why it is wrong to hold a professional conference in such a state and why solidarity requires the support of all moral persons. While this article describes the importance of this principle now in terms of LGBTQ+ persons, it may also apply soon or even now with regard to persons of colour, women, and/or visiting non-American citizens. It is also shown why solidarity against impermissible sacrifices is a better way to ground decisions about locating or attending conferences than a teleological argument about boycotts to change policy
Journal of Community Informatics Special Issue: Charting Sovereignty in the Digital Age: Tribal Leadership, Broadband, and the Rise of Tribal Digital Sovereignty. Introduction
No full textThis special issue of the Journal of Community Informatics presents a collection of articles exploring the historical trajectory and contemporary convergence of grassroots telecommunications policy advocacy in Indian Country. The articles in the special edition posit that Tribal Digital Sovereignty (TDS) has emerged as a definitive governance framework for Tribal Nations, evolving from decades of work by scholars and practitioners at the intersection of federal Indian law, telecommunications, digital equity, and tribal self-determination. The COVID-19 pandemic served as a pivotal catalyst for this evolution, recasting broadband from a luxury to an essential lifeline and exposing deep-seated disparities in connectivity. This crisis opened an unprecedented opportunity for Tribal Nations to take a seat at the policy table and invest in infrastructure through historic federal investments through the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. These investments have allowed Tribal governments to move beyond bridging the digital divide toward creating community-led solutions shaped by sovereignty and self-determination.Despite a shifting political and funding landscape, Tribal Nations have successfully transitioned from reactive investments to proactive self-determination in the digital realm. This special issue examines TDS as an umbrella framework encompassing both Network Sovereignty—the authority over physical infrastructure—and Data Sovereignty—the governance of information and its transmission. The articles document how Tribal governments can and are actively institutionalizing long-term strategies, including the development of regulatory codes and protocols to protect governmental and other data. By tracing historical inequities alongside recent advancements, this collection highlights a foundational shift: Tribal Nations are no longer passive beneficiaries of federal policy but are the primary architects of digital futures grounded in their unique cultural, political, and legal foundations
Intersectional Lenses of DEI: Bioethicists’ Duty to Advocate
No full textEn nous appuyant sur les fondements historiques de la bioéthique, nous soutenons que les bioéthiciens, avec leurs approches et leurs parcours intrinsèquement interdisciplinaires, sont bien placés pour promouvoir l’équité, la diversité et l’inclusion (EDI) dans le milieu des soins de santé grâce à la pratique de l’éthique clinique. Dans le climat culturel et politique actuel, les bioéthiciens ne peuvent rester silencieux tout en restant fidèles aux principes de leur domaine. Les dispositions du code de déontologie de l’American Society for Bioethics and Humanities (ASBH) et l’expérience vécue par les bioéthiciens canadiens offrent des orientations pertinentes. Nous soutenons que la compétence en éthique clinique oblige les bioéthiciens à identifier et à chercher à éliminer les obstacles systémiques auxquels sont confrontés ceux que les éthiciens cliniques ont le privilège de servir. En adoptant une approche intersectionnelle de la bioéthique clinique, les bioéthiciens peuvent devenir les défenseurs de la promotion de soins de santé équitables.Building on the historical foundation of bioethics, we argue that bioethicists, with inherently interdisciplinary approaches and backgrounds, are well positioned to promote Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) in the healthcare setting through the practice of clinical ethics. In the current cultural and political climate, bioethicists cannot remain silent while staying true to the tenets of the field. Provisions in the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities (ASBH) Code of Ethics and the lived experience of Canadian bioethicists offer relevant guidance. We argue that competence in clinical ethics obliges bioethicists to identify and seek to remove systemic barriers facing those whom clinical ethicists are privileged to serve. By adopting an intersectional approach to clinical bioethics, bioethicists can become advocates for the promotion of just healthcare
Defining and Putting into Practice Tribal Digital Sovereignty
No full textThis article advances the concept of Tribal Digital Sovereignty (TDS) as a critical framework for understanding and governing the digital futures of Tribal Nations. TDS encompasses the entire digital ecosystem: infrastructure, software, policy, and human capacity. Drawing on Federal Indian Law, Indigenous governance traditions, and global debates on digital sovereignty, the article situates TDS as both a continuation of longstanding assertions of sovereignty and a necessary response to 21st-century technological challenges.To operationalize this framework, the article adapts Benjamin Bratton’s stack model to highlight how Tribal Nations can exercise sovereignty in digital spaces, for example, by building broadband networks, establishing data governance offices, and developing culturally grounded digital tools. The article concludes by calling for comprehensive strategies that integrate legal infrastructure, capacity building, and economic planning to ensure Tribal Nations are not merely users of global systems but sovereign architects of them. In doing so, it charts a path toward a Sovereign stack aligned with the long-term flourishing of Indigenous Nations in a networked world