Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Agich and Siemionov are to be congratulated for their attempt to refocus the debate on facial transplantation on those with most to gain: individuals with severe facial disfigurement.1 They make a good case for the surgical benefits offered by what they term facial allograft transplantation (FAT). Moreover, they fare better than other teams in recognising that candidates for FAT might also have much to lose. The team in Louisville (which has dominated many discussions) had little to say on this issue, writing only rather benignly of the possible “loss of transplanted tissue”.2 In contrast, Agich and Siemionov squarely confront this risk and offer the most complete account to date of how the risk will be minimised and rejection dealt with. This is an important development, which can only enhance the discussions that, contrary to what these authors imply, must indeed continue.
According to Agich and Siemionov, their paper also provides a counterbalance to the numerous more sceptical views being expressed in bioethical and media circles—views which are said to rely more on fiction than fact. In response, we wish to argue that, as persuasive as some of their arguments undoubtedly are, the authors will not succeed in stalling this debate for there remain numerous issues that require further attention. We start with a central component of the authors’ argument, their appeal to “clinical need”, and suggest that this is not straightforwardly identifiable. No more straightforward is their suggestion that metaphors and lessons from the creative world have no place in this (or any bioethical?) debate. This seems particularly unlikely when we consider that FAT will not offer the “ideal” solution; perhaps, then, wholesale facial transplantation is or will become the ideal and a film like Face/Off can offer some insights. Finally, we query the role and influence of …
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Until they have faces: the ethics of facial allograft transplantation
- Facial allograft transplantation, personal identity and subjectivity
- Equity in access to facial transplantation
- Justifying surgery’s last taboo: the ethics of face transplants
- Vascularised composite allotransplantation: implications for the Defence Medical Services
- Facial allograft transplants: where’s the catch?
- ‘A Procedure Without a Problem’, or the face transplant that didn’t happen. The Royal Free, the Royal College of Surgeons and the challenge of surgical firsts
- ‘That is the skin of my brother’: alterity, hybridity and media representations of facial transplantation
- Face transplantation for the blind: more than being blind in a sighted world
- From Face/Off to the face race: the case of Isabelle Dinoire and the future of the face transplant