Since the 1980s, anthropologists have criticized a US-centric view of bioethics that presents individual autonomy as a universal principle without acknowledging its embeddedness in time and place. A recent turn in this critique points out how this view has gained dominance across the world, traveling alongside clinical trials and global health interventions. Here, centering a competing bioethical vision disrupts this division between the Global North as a site of ethical conceptualization and the South as the recipient of its diffusion. Indian legal bioethics—concerned with protecting the critically ill body in intensive care—rejects the primacy of autonomy, instead empowering courts to override the choices of patients, families, and doctors. This competing bioethics commits its own harms, misrepresenting vulnerability as a problem of sociomoral underdevelopment rather than as the outcome of increasing inflows of global capital, new patterns of land acquisition, and a growing public-private health care divide. [bioethics, end of life, norms, ethics, medicine, law, intensive care, Delhi, India]

中文翻译：

---

地方化生物伦理学

自 1980 年代以来，人类学家批评了一种以美国为中心的生命伦理学观点，该观点将个人自主权视为一项普遍原则，却不承认其在时间和地点中的嵌入性。这种批评最近的一个转变指出了这种观点是如何在世界范围内获得主导地位的，与临床试验和全球健康干预措施并驾齐驱。在这里，以相互竞争的生物伦理愿景为中心，打破了作为伦理概念化场所的全球北方与作为其传播接受者的南方之间的这种划分。印度法律生命伦理学——关注保护重症监护中的危重病人——拒绝自主权的首要地位，而是授权法院凌驾于患者、家属和医生的选择之上。这种相互竞争的生物伦理学有其自身的危害，将脆弱性误认为是社会道德欠发达的问题，而不是全球资本流入增加、土地征用新模式和公私医疗保健差距扩大的结果。[生物伦理学，生命的终结，规范，伦理，医学，法律，重症监护，德里，印度]