This paper explores the spatial dimensions of bioethical theory and practice, arguing that where bioethics is done—whether in universities, hospitals, medical education settings, or community spaces—shapes not only the discourse but also the possibilities for public engagement and political contestation. Contrary to dominant liberal narratives, bioethics is not a neutral or placeless endeavour but one deeply embedded in and shaped by its spatial contexts. Drawing on Michel Foucault’s notion of heterotopia, I argue that bioethics must attend to the multiplicity and symbolic ordering of spaces. Unlike the “nowhere” of the utopia, heterotopias are “actually realized utopias” that juxtapose contradictory meanings and practices, functioning as counter-sites that reflect, invert, and contest dominant norms. As Foucault suggests, these spaces—like mirrors—are simultaneously real and unreal, shaping how subjects relate to themselves and others. As such, clinical, academic, governmental and community spaces can simultaneously represent, contest, and reverse dominant norms. In this light, bioethics is not placeless but deeply embedded in spatial contexts. Using cases from the history of bioethics in Australia, I will demonstrate how place mediates relationships—between people, institutions, and ethical frameworks—and influences health outcomes and public health ethics. By foregrounding the heterotopic spatial politics of bioethics, this paper calls for a more reflexive and inclusive approach that embraces the multiplicity of places where bioethics is practiced and contested.