Beneficence in general practice: an empirical investigation

Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (5):388-393 (1999)
OBJECTIVES: To study and report the attitudes of patients and general practitioners (GPs) concerning the obligation of doctors to act for the good of their patients, and to provide a practical account of beneficence in general practice. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews administered to GPs and patients. SETTING AND SAMPLE: Participants randomly recruited from an age and gender stratified list of GPs in a geographically defined region of South Australia. The sample comprised twenty-one general practitioners and seventeen patients recruited by participating GPs. RESULTS: In practice, acting for the good of the patient not only accommodates the views of patients and GPs on expertise and knowing best, but also responds to the particular details of the clinical situation. Patients had a complex understanding of the expertise necessary for medical practice, describing a contextual domain in which they were expert, and which complemented the scientific expertise of their GPs. General practitioners identified multiple sources for their expertise, of which experience was the most significant. The role of the GP included responding to individual patients and particular clinical problems and ranged from the assumption of responsibility through to the proffering of medical advice. CONCLUSION: This study found that GPs acting for the good of their patients covered a variety of GP actions and patient preferences. Beneficence was not justified by presumed patient vulnerability or the inability of patients to understand medical problems, but furthered through a recognition of the different areas of expertise contributed by both parties to the consultation
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1136/jme.25.5.388
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 15,914
External links
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Hugh Lacey (2002). Assessing the Value of Transgenic Crops. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):497-511.
Kristoffer Ahlstrom (2008). Epistemology and Empirical Investigation. Grazer Philosophische Studien 76 (1):109-134.
Dan Zahavi (2011). Złożona jaźń: Perspektywy empiryczne i teoretyczne. Avant: Trends in Interdisciplinary Studies 2 (T):59 - 75.
James W. McAllister (1991). The Simplicity of Theories: Its Degree and Form. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 22 (1):1-14.
Diego S. Silva (2010). Dignity Promotion and Beneficence. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (4):365-372.

Monthly downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

Added to index


Total downloads

2 ( #534,045 of 1,725,565 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

2 ( #268,753 of 1,725,565 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.