When four principles are too many: bloodgate, integrity and an action-guiding model of ethical decision making in clinical practice

Medical ethical analysis remains dominated by the principlist account first proposed by Beauchamp and Childress. This paper argues that the principlist model is unreflective of how ethical decisions are taken in clinical practice. Two kinds of medical ethical decisions are distinguished: biosocial e...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Muirhead, William (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2012
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2012, Volume: 38, Issue: 4, Pages: 195-196
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Description
Summary:Medical ethical analysis remains dominated by the principlist account first proposed by Beauchamp and Childress. This paper argues that the principlist model is unreflective of how ethical decisions are taken in clinical practice. Two kinds of medical ethical decisions are distinguished: biosocial ethics and clinical ethics. It is argued that principlism is an inappropriate model for clinical ethics as it is neither sufficiently action-guiding nor does it emphasise the professional integrity of the clinician. An alternative model is proposed for decision making in the realm of clinical ethics.
ISSN:1473-4257
Contains:Enthalten in: Journal of medical ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100136