David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 6 (3):227-233 (2003)
During the last thirty years different methods have been proposed in order to manage and resolve ethical quandaries, specially in the clinical setting. Some of these methodologies are based on the principles of Decision-making theory. Others looked to other philosophical traditions, like Principlism, Hermeneutics, Narrativism, Casuistry, Pragmatism, etc. This paper defends the view that deliberation is the cornerstone of any adequate methodology. This is due to the fact that moral decisions must take into account not only principles and ideas, but also emotions, values and beliefs. Deliberation is the process in which everyone concerned by the decision is considered a valid moral agent, obliged to give reasons for their own points of view, and to listen to the reasons of others. The goal of this process is not the reaching of a consensus but the enrichment of one's own point of view with that of the others, increasing in this way the maturity of one's own decision, in order to make it more wise or prudent. In many cases the members of a group of deliberation will differ in the final solution of the case, but the confrontation of their reasons will modify the perception of the problem of everyone. This is the profit of the process. Our moral decisions cannot be completely rational, due to the fact that they are influenced by feelings, values, beliefs, etc., but they must be reasonable, that is, wise and prudent. Deliberation is the main procedure to reach this goal. It obliges us to take others into account, respecting their different beliefs and values and prompting them to give reasons for their own points of view. This method has been traditional in Western clinical medicine all over its history, and it should be also the main procedure for clinical ethics
|Keywords||clinical medicine conflict of value decision-making deliberation ethical problem nosology reason|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Mia Svantesson, Jan Karlsson, Pierre Boitte, Jan Schildman, Linda Dauwerse, Guy Widdershoven, Reidar Pedersen, Martijn Huisman & Bert Molewijk (2014). Outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation - the Development of an Evaluation Instrument for Clinical Ethics Support (the Euro-MCD). BMC Medical Ethics 15 (1):30.
Shannon McDermott (2011). Ethical Decision Making in Situations of Self-Neglect and Squalor Among Older People. Ethics and Social Welfare 5 (1):52-71.
Similar books and articles
Bert Molewijk, Dick Kleinlugtenbelt & Guy Widdershoven (2011). The Role of Emotions in Moral Case Deliberation: Theory, Practice, and Methodology. Bioethics 25 (7):383-393.
Diego Garcia (2001). Moral Deliberation: The Role of Methodologies in Clinical Ethics. [REVIEW] Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (2):223-232.
Erik Schneiderhan & Shamus Khan (2008). Reasons and Inclusion: The Foundation of Deliberation. Sociological Theory 26 (1):1 - 24.
Norbert Steinkamp & Bert Gordijn (2003). Ethical Case Deliberation on the Ward. A Comparison of Four Methods. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 6 (3):235-246.
Holly M. Smith (2010). The Moral Clout of Reasonable Beliefs. In Mark Timmons (ed.), Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics, Vol. I. Oxford University Press
Donnie J. Self & Joy D. Skeel (1991). A Study of the Foundations of Ethical Decision Making of Clinical Medical Ethicists. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 12 (2).
Isaac Levi (1986). Hard Choices: Decision Making Under Unresolved Conflict. Cambridge University Press.
Bert Molewijk, Dick Kleinlugtenbelt, Scott Pugh & Guy Widdershoven (2011). Emotions and Clinical Ethics Support. A Moral Inquiry Into Emotions in Moral Case Deliberation. HEC Forum 23 (4):257-268.
Anders Nordgren (2002). Wisdom, Casuistry, and the Goal of Reproductive Counseling. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 (3):281-289.
Joseph J. Fins, Matthew D. Bacchetta & Franklin G. Miller (1997). Clinical Pragmatism: A Method of Moral Problem Solving. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 7 (2):129-143.
Richard J. McKenna (1996). Explaining Amoral Decision Making: An External View of a Human Disaster. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 15 (6):681 - 694.
John Mark Freeman (1987). Tough Decisions: A Casebook in Medical Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Shane Ralston (2010). Dewey and Goodin on the Value of Monological Deliberation. Etica E Politica 12 (1):235-255.
Added to index2010-08-31
Total downloads27 ( #100,874 of 1,700,363 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #128,702 of 1,700,363 )
How can I increase my downloads?