Get the facts right: time for evidence-based ethics

How much should ethicists know about the topics they comment on? Is it enough to have a vague idea? Should they be required to demonstrate an understanding of the subject matter? Are they required to pay attention to available evidence?In response to Schuklenk's and Vathorst's proposal tha...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: MacKintosh, David (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2015
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2015, Volume: 41, Issue: 10, Pages: 830-831
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1816152048
003 DE-627
005 20230426115831.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/medethics-2015-103052  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1816152048 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1816152048 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a MacKintosh, David  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Get the facts right: time for evidence-based ethics 
264 1 |c 2015 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a How much should ethicists know about the topics they comment on? Is it enough to have a vague idea? Should they be required to demonstrate an understanding of the subject matter? Are they required to pay attention to available evidence?In response to Schuklenk's and Vathorst's proposal that individuals with treatment-resistant depression should have access to assisted dying,1 Christopher Cowley has presented a contrary argument based on comparison with the situation faced by patients with motor neurone disease (MND).2 In Cowley's view, MND is a “non-terminal but untreatable debilitating disease(s)” which “… does not affect the brain”. The basis for using MND for comparison is, presumably, that patients with MND have access to assisted dying despite its ‘non-terminal’ nature.This argument raises a number of points. Probably the most important of these is that while MND is incurable some treatment with admittedly modest disease-modifying effect is available. It is, however, quite incorrect to say that MND is “non-terminal” and “… does not affect the brain”, as will be demonstrated below.3 This then begs the question of whether or not Cowley's argument is damaged by this invalid comparison, and if so, to what extent. Additionally, there is the problem of discourse outside one's primary area of expertise. To what extent is somebody in Cowley's position required to verify the matters of fact regarding their assertions? What is the duty of the reviewer or editor in this … 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 41(2015), 10, Seite 830-831  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:41  |g year:2015  |g number:10  |g pages:830-831 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/44014226  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2015-103052  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/41/10/830.abstract  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4185605978 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1816152048 
LOK |0 005 20220908053647 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-03#3D1F88041AB26939D0ADE7A4D2018616DF451AE7 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/44014226 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1  |b inherited from superior work 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw