By Richard Ashcroft, Anneke Lucassen, Professor Michael Parker, Marian Verkerk, Guy Widdershoven
Masking the most equipment for interpreting moral difficulties in sleek medication, Anneke Lucassen, a clinician, starts by way of providing an ethically difficult genetics case drawn from her scientific event. it's then analysed from diverse theoretical issues of view. each one ethicist takes a selected method, illustrating it in motion and giving the reader a uncomplicated grounding in its critical components. each one bankruptcy will be learn by itself, yet comparability among them supplies the reader a feeling of to what volume method in scientific ethics concerns, and the way diverse theoretical beginning issues can result in varied sensible conclusions. on the finish, Lucassen deals a clinician's reaction to some of the moral tools defined.
Read or Download Case Analysis in Clinical Ethics PDF
Similar medical ethics books
Lately, advantage theories have loved a renaissance of curiosity between basic and scientific ethicists. This e-book deals a virtue-based ethic for medication, the wellbeing and fitness professions, and health and wellbeing care. starting with a ancient account of the concept that of advantage, the authors build a idea of where of the virtues in scientific perform.
How medical professionals imagine defines the character and value of medical judgment. even supposing physicians utilize technology, this publication argues that medication isn't itself a technological know-how yet fairly an interpretive perform that will depend on scientific reasoning. a doctor seems to be on the patient's background besides the providing actual symptoms and juxtaposes those with scientific adventure and empirical reports to build a tentative account of the disorder.
There's a range of ‘ethical practices’ inside of medication as an institutionalised occupation in addition to a necessity for moral experts either in perform in addition to in institutionalised roles. This short deals a social standpoint on scientific ethics schooling. It discusses a variety of suggestions correct to academic conception and hence offers a easy illumination of the topic.
Controlling Our Destinies offers the reflections of a global staff of students from numerous humanistic disciplines at the historic origins, the philosophical content material, the moral matters, and the science-religion questions raised via the HGP. participants comprise John Beatty, Robert Bud, Arthur Caplan, Alice Domurat Dreger, Kevin Fitzgerald, Jean-Paul Gaudillière, Jean Gayon, Marguerite Hays, Lily Kay, Evelyn Fox Keller, Philip Kitcher, Timothy Lenoir, Richard McCormick, Ernan McMullin, Edward Manier, Timothy Murphy, John Opitz, Diane Paul, Arthur Peacocke, Martin Pernick, Hans Jörg Rheinberger, Kenneth Schaffner, Phillip R.
- Life and death : philosophical essays in biomedical ethics
- Principles of Health Care Ethics
- Before Bioethics: A History of American Medical Ethics from the Colonial Period to the Bioethics Revolution
- Action, Ability and Health: Essays in the Philosophy of Action and Welfare
- The Great Starvation Experiment: Ancel Keys and the Men Who Starved for Science
- Toward a Small Family Ethic: How Overpopulation and Climate Change Are Affecting the Morality of Procreation
Extra resources for Case Analysis in Clinical Ethics
Phyllis then reports that she has had ‘the operation’. At around that time she also underwent genetic testing, apparently without actually being asked whether she wished to be genetically tested or not, and without being told that the test results could carry significance for her extended family: ‘he just took the blood sample’. Nevertheless, Phyllis recalls discussions with her oncologist, concerning the reasons for such testing, the results of which – she was led to believe – might be of benefit to herself in determining the best treatment of her particular cancer.
Or should we advise Jane that there is not enough evidence for surgery in any case? Even without these ambiguities I feel it is difficult to know how to proceed when there is such a direct clash of interests between family members. Clearly, negotiation might help but my colleague has tried hard to suggest to Phyllis that it would be in the interest of her family to disclose (and that in itself is difficult to do without breaking Jane’s confidentiality), but she just doesn’t see it as in her best interest.
She has information that is highly relevant to Jane, yet she is withholding it. I think that we should make it a condition of testing in the first place, that it will be all right to use the test result for the benefit of other family members. Of course, I realise this may prevent people like Phyllis taking the test in the first place, so Jane would be no better off, but at least we wouldn’t be in the difficult dilemma we are in now. Personally, I feel it is wrong to be referring Jane on for such major surgery when I have information, which I cannot share with her, that may make this surgery unnecessary.