Year:

  1.  8
    What Kind of Principle Is Clinical Equipoise?Luca Chiapperino & Cecilia Nardini - 2014 - Theoretical and Applied Ethics 3 (1):1-16.
    Equipoise, or the criterion of honest professional uncertainty in the clinical community, is currently the most widely accepted standard for adjudicating the ethical dilemmas of medical research involving human patients. Nonetheless, equipoise has recently become a subject of considerable criticism. Among the objections to equipoise, an important one is based on the observation of an objective difficulty for equipoise in providing sound ethical guidance in practical circumstances that arise in clinical research. A chief example of such problem is represented by (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  3
    Projectability, Disagreement, and Consensus: A Challenge to Clinical Equipoise.Mark Fedyk & Michel Shamy - 2014 - Theoretical and Applied Ethics 3 (1):17-34.
    Clinical equipoise links ethically appropriate medical research with medical research that has the reasonable chance of resolving debates. We argue against this principle on the ground that most debates in medicine cannot be resolved by the outcomes of any particular empirical study. In fact, a deep understanding of the methodology of scientific research leads to the conclusion that adopting clinical equipoise as an ethical standard for medical research would deprive medical researchers of the ability to confirm clinical hypotheses.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3.  4
    Uncertainty, Bias, and Equipoise: A New Approach to the Ethics of Clinical Research.Michael Goldsby & William P. Kabasenche - 2014 - Theoretical and Applied Ethics 3 (1):35-59.
    The concept of equipoise is considered by many to be part of the ethical justification for using human subjects in clinical research. In general, equipoise indicates some uncertainty about the relative merits of the experimental intervention compared to existing treatments. Relieving this uncertainty gives scientific value to an experiment, thereby making the risks to human subjects in the trial acceptable, other considerations notwithstanding. But characterizing equipoise remains controversial since Freedman’s groundbreaking publication on the subject. We offer a new account of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  1
    Asymmetrical Applications, General Norms and Specified Duties: A Commentary on Tapper and Millet’s “Is Professional Ethics Grounded in General Ethical Principles?”.B. Andrew Lustig - 2014 - Theoretical and Applied Ethics 3 (1):81-86.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  25
    Is Professional Ethics Grounded in General Ethical Principles?Alan Tapper & Stephan Millett - 2014 - Theoretical and Applied Ethics 3 (1):61-80.
    This article questions the commonly held view that professional ethics is grounded in general ethical principles, in particular, respect for client (or patient) autonomy and beneficence in the treatment of clients (or patients). Although these are admirable as general ethical principles, we argue that there is considerable logical difficulty in applying them to the professional-client relationship. The transition from general principles to professional ethics cannot be made because the intended conclusion applies differently to each of the parties involved, whereas the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6. Quotidian Confabulations: An Ethical Quandary Concerning Flashbulb Memories.Chris Weigel - 2014 - Theoretical and Applied Ethics 3 (1):87-110.
    Those with Anton’s syndrome believe they can see things around them even though they are completely blind. Patients with this and other syndromes confabulate in predictable circumstances: they believe and assert obvious falsehoods. I argue in this article that absent competing obligations, provoking such confabulations for non-medical purposes is problematic. I further argue that these confabulations share all relevant properties with a particular kind of everyday confabulation. Flashbulb memories—memories of surprising, monumental, emotionally laden events—are also believed, obvious falsehoods that occur (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
 Previous issues
  
Next issues