S Matthew Liao
S. Matthew Liao
Scroll
Director of the Center for Bioethics
Arthur Zitrin Professor of Bioethics
-
Professional overview
-
Dr. Matthew Liao uses the tools of philosophy to study and examine the ramifications of novel biomedical innovations.
A speaker at TEDxCERN, Dr. Liao discussed whether it is ethical for someone to erase certain aspects of their memories and how doing so might affect that individual's identity. He has also given a TED talk in New York and been featured in the New York Times, The Atlantic, The Guardian, and other numerous media outlets.
The author and editor of four books, Dr. Liao provides the academic community with a collection of human rights essays. In The Right to be Loved, he explores the philosophical foundations underpinning children's right to be loved, and proposes that we reconceptualize our policies concerning adoptions so that individuals who are not romantically linked can co-adopt a child together.
Dr. Liao provides students with an education grounded in a broad conception of bioethics encompassing both medical and environmental ethics. He offers students the opportunity to explore the intersection of human rights practice with central domains of public health and regularly teaches normative theory and neuroethics. His courses address how the rightness or wrongness of an act is determined and ethical issues arising out of new medical technologies such as embryonic stem cell research, cloning, artificial reproduction, and genetic engineering; ethical issues raised by the development and use of neuroscientific technologies such as the ethics of erasing traumatic memories; the ethics of mood and cognitive enhancements; and moral and legal implications of "mind-reading" technologies for brain privacy.
To learn more about Dr. Liao and his work, visit his website and blog.
-
Education
-
AB, Politics (Magna Cum Laude), Princeton University, Princeton, NJDPhil, Philosophy, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
-
Honors and awards
-
Outstanding Academic Title, The Right to Be Loved, Choice Review (2016)TEDx Speaker at CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2015)TEDx Speaker, New York, NY (2013)Humanities Grant Initiative, NYU (2011)Big Think Delphi Fellow (2011)
-
Areas of research and study
-
BioethicsEpistemologyMetaphysicsMoral Psychology
-
Publications
Publications
The right of children to be loved
Liao, S. M. (n.d.). In What is Right for Children? (1–).Publication year
2009Page(s)
347-363The role of animal models in evaluating reasonable safety and efficacy for human trials of cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions
AbstractRegenberg, A., Mathews, D. J., Blass, D. M., Bok, H., Coyle, J. T., Duggan, P., Faden, R., Finkel, J., Gearhart, J. D., Hillis, A., Hoke, A., Johnson, R., Johnston, M., Kahn, J., Kerr, D., King, P., Kurtzberg, J., Liao, S. M., McDonald, J. W., … Traystman, R. J. (n.d.).Publication year
2009Journal title
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and MetabolismVolume
29Issue
1Page(s)
1-9AbstractProgress in regenerative medicine seems likely to produce new treatments for neurologic conditions that use human cells as therapeutic agents; at least one trial for such an intervention is already under way. The development of cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions (CBI-NCs) will likely include preclinical studies using animals as models for humans with conditions of interest. This paper explores predictive validity challenges and the proper role for animal models in developing CBI-NCs. In spite of limitations, animal models are and will remain an essential tool for gathering data in advance of first-in-human clinical trials. The goal of this paper is to provide a realistic lens for viewing the role of animal models in the context of CBI-NCs and to provide recommendations for moving forward through this challenging terrain.Unintended changes in cognition, mood, and behavior arising from cell-based interventions for neurological conditions: Ethical challenges
AbstractDuggan, P. S., Siegel, A. W., Blass, D. M., Bok, H., Coyle, J. T., Faden, R., Finkel, J., Gearhart, J. D., Greely, H. T., Hillis, A., Hoke, A., Johnson, R., Johnston, M., Kahn, J., Kerr, D., King, P., Kurtzberg, J., Liao, S. M., McDonald, J. W., … Mathews, D. J. (n.d.).Publication year
2009Journal title
American Journal of BioethicsVolume
9Issue
5Page(s)
31-36AbstractThe prospect of using cell-based interventions (CBIs) to treat neurological conditions raises several important ethical and policy questions. In this target article, we focus on issues related to the unique constellation of traits that characterize CBIs targeted at the central nervous system. In particular, there is at least a theoretical prospect that these cells will alter the recipients' cognition, mood, and behavior-brain functions that are central to our concept of the self. The potential for such changes, although perhaps remote, is cause for concern and careful ethical analysis. Both to enable better informed consent in the future and as an end in itself, we argue that early human trials of CBIs for neurological conditions must monitor subjects for changes in cognition, mood, and behavior; further, we recommend concrete steps for that monitoring. Such steps will help better characterize the potential risks and benefits of CBIs as they are tested and potentially used for treatment.A defense of intuitions
AbstractLiao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2008Journal title
Philosophical StudiesVolume
140Issue
2Page(s)
247-262AbstractRadical experimentalists argue that we should give up using intuitions as evidence in philosophy. In this paper, I first argue that the studies presented by the radical experimentalists in fact suggest that some intuitions are reliable. I next consider and reject a different way of handling the radical experimentalists' challenge, what I call the Argument from Robust Intuitions. I then propose a way of understanding why some intuitions can be unreliable and how intuitions can conflict, and I argue that on this understanding, both moderate experimentalism and the standard philosophical practice of using intuitions as evidence can help resolve these conflicts.Cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions: Ethical challenges for early human trials
AbstractMathews, D. J., Sugarman, J., Bok, H., Blass, D. M., Coyle, J. T., Duggan, P., Finkel, J., Greely, H. T., Hillis, A., Hoke, A., Johnson, R., Johnston, M., Kahn, J., Kerr, D., Kurtzberg, J., Liao, S. M., McDonald, J. W., McKhann, G., Nelson, K. B., … Faden, R. (n.d.).Publication year
2008Journal title
NeurologyVolume
71Issue
4Page(s)
288-293AbstractBackground: Attempts to translate basic stem cell research into treatments for neurologic diseases and injury are well under way. With a clinical trial for one such treatment approved and in progress in the United States, and additional proposals under review, we must begin to address the ethical issues raised by such early forays into human clinical trials for cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions. Methods: An interdisciplinary working group composed of experts in neuroscience, cell biology, bioethics, law, and transplantation, along with leading disease researchers, was convened twice over 2 years to identify and deliberate on the scientific and ethical issues raised by the transition from preclinical to clinical research of cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions. Results: While the relevant ethical issues are in many respects standard challenges of human subjects research, they are heightened in complexity by the novelty of the science, the focus on the CNS, and the political climate in which the science is proceeding. Conclusions: Distinctive challenges confronting US scientists, administrators, institutional review boards, stem cell research oversight committees, and others who will need to make decisions about work involving stem cells and their derivatives and evaluate the ethics of early human trials include evaluating the risks, safety, and benefits of these trials, determining and evaluating cell line provenance, and determining inclusion criteria, informed consent, and the ethics of conducting early human trials in the public spotlight. Further study and deliberation by stakeholders is required to move toward professional and institutional policies and practices governing this research.Issues in the pharmacological induction of emotions
AbstractWasserman, D., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2008Journal title
Journal of Applied PhilosophyVolume
25Issue
3Page(s)
178-192AbstractIn this paper, we examine issues raised by the possibility of regulating emotions through pharmacological means. We argue that emotions induced through these means can be authentic phenomenologically, and that the manner of inducing them need not make them any less our own than emotions arising ‘naturally’. We recognize that in taking drugs to induce emotions, one may lose opportunities for self-knowledge; act narcissistically; or treat oneself as a mere means. But we propose that there are circumstances in which none of these concerns arise. Finally, we consider how the possibility of drug-regulation might affect duties to feel emotions.Selecting Children: The Ethics of Reproductive Genetic Engineering
Liao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2008Journal title
Philosophy CompassVolume
3Issue
5Page(s)
973-991Special issue: the ethics of enhancement
Liao, S. M., Savulescu, J., & Wasserman, D. (n.d.).Publication year
2008Journal title
Journal of Applied PhilosophyVolume
25Issue
3The Normativity of Memory Modification
Sandberg, A., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2008Journal title
NeuroethicsVolume
1Issue
2Page(s)
85-99Who Is Afraid of Numbers?
Liao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2008Journal title
UtilitasVolume
20Issue
4Page(s)
447-461Ethical and policy issues relating to progenitor-cell-based strategies for prevention of atherosclerosis
AbstractLiao, S. M., Goldschmidt, P. J., Sugarman, J., Bok, H., Brown, H., Alta Charo, R., Faden, R., Hare, J., Kahn, J., Kurtzberg, J., Manton, K. G., Moreno, J., Shanawani, H., Sulmasy, D. P., Taylor, H., & Zoloth, L. (n.d.).Publication year
2007Journal title
Journal of Medical EthicsVolume
33Issue
11Page(s)
643-646AbstractObjective: To examine important ethical and societal issues relating to the use of progenitor-cell-based strategies for disease prevention, particularly atherosclerosis. Background: Several nascent lines of evidence suggest the feasibility of using progenitor cells to reverse the health consequence of atherosclerosis. Such potential uses of progenitor cells are scientifically exciting, yet they raise important ethical and societal issues. Method: The Working Group on Ethics of Progenitor Cell-based Strategies for Disease Prevention met to discuss the relevant issues. Several drafts of a report were then circulated to the entire Working Group for comments until a consensus was reached. Results: Scientific evidence suggests the appropriateness of using progenitor-cell-based strategies for some rare conditions involving atherosclerosis, but additional preclinical data are needed for other, more prevalent conditions before human trials begin. All such trials raise a set of ethical issues, especially since trials aimed at prevention rather than treatment may involve persons who do not yet have disease but will be exposed to the risks of interventions. In addition, enrolment in prevention trials may be hazardous and harmful if participants erroneously believe experimental interventions will necessarily prevent disease. Finally, given the high prevalence of atherosclerosis, there are some important public policy implications of taking such an approach to prevention, including the sources of progenitor cells for such interventions as well as the allocation of health resources. Conclusion: Potential uses of progenitor-cell-based strategies for preventing atherosclerosis must be considered in the context of a range of social and ethical issues.The Ashley treatment: Best interests, convenience, and parental decision-making
Liao, S. M., Savulescu, J., & Sheehan, M. (n.d.).Publication year
2007Journal title
Hastings Center ReportVolume
37Issue
2Page(s)
16-20Time-relative interests and abortion
AbstractLiao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2007Journal title
Journal of Moral PhilosophyVolume
4Issue
2Page(s)
242-256AbstractThe concept of a time-relative interest is introduced by Jeff McMahan to solve certain puzzles about the badness of death. Some people (e.g. McMahan and David DeGrazia) believe that this concept can also be used to show that abortion is permissible. In this paper, I first argue that if the Time-Relative Interest Account permits abortion, then it would also permit infanticide. I next reject the suggestion that the Time-Relative Interest Account can at least explain the permissibility of early abortion, even if it cannot explain the permissibility of late abortion. Given this, early and late abortions have to be justified on other grounds.The Embryo Rescue Case
AbstractLiao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2006Journal title
Theoretical Medicine and BioethicsVolume
27Issue
2Page(s)
141-147AbstractIn the debate regarding the moral status of human embryos, the Embryo Rescue Case has been used to suggest that embryos are not rightholders. This case is premised on the idea that in a situation where one has a choice between saving some number of embryos or a child, it seems wrong to save the embryos and not the child. If so, it seems that embryos cannot be rightholders. In this paper, I argue that the Embryo Rescue Case does not independently show that embryos are not rightholders.The idea of a duty to love
Liao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2006Journal title
Journal of Value InquiryVolume
40Issue
1Page(s)
1-22The organism view defended
Matthew Liao, S. (n.d.).Publication year
2006Journal title
MonistVolume
89Issue
3Page(s)
334-350The right of children to be loved
Matthew Liao, S. (n.d.).Publication year
2006Journal title
Journal of Political PhilosophyVolume
14Issue
4Page(s)
420-440Rescuing human embryonic stem cell research: The blastocyst transfer method
AbstractLiao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2005Journal title
American Journal of BioethicsVolume
5Issue
6Page(s)
8-16AbstractDespite the therapeutic potential of human embryonic stem (HES) cells, many people believe that HES cell research should be banned. The reason is that the present method of extracting HES cells involves the destruction of the embryo, which for many is the beginning of a person. This paper examines a number of compromise solutions such as parthenogenesis, the use of defective embryos, genetically creating a "pseudo embryo" that can never form a placenta, and determining embryo death, and argues that none of these proposals are likely to satisfy embryoists, that is, those who regard the embryo as a person. This paper then proposes a method of extracting HES cells, what might be called the Blastocyst Transfer Method, that meets the ethical requirements of embryoists, and it considers some possible concerns regarding this method. It concludes by encouraging future HES cell research to investigate this method.Response to commentators on "Rescuing human embryonic stem cell research: The blastocyst transfer method" [1]
Liao, S. M. (n.d.). In American Journal of Bioethics (1–).Publication year
2005Volume
5Issue
6Page(s)
W10-W13The ethics of using genetic engineering for sex selection
AbstractLiao, S. M. (n.d.).Publication year
2005Journal title
Journal of Medical EthicsVolume
31Issue
2Page(s)
116-118AbstractIt is quite likely that parents will soon be able to use genetic engineering to select the sex of their child by directly manipulating the sex of an embryo. Some might think that this method would be a more ethical method of sex selection than present technologies such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) because, unlike PGD, it does not need to create and destroy "wrong gendered" embryos. This paper argues that those who object to present technologies on the grounds that the embryo is a person are unlikely to be persuaded by this proposal, though for different reasons.