Illness and disease: an empirical-ethical viewpoint

BMC Medical Ethics 20 (1):5 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The concepts of disease, illness and sickness capture fundamentally different aspects of phenomena related to human ailments and healthcare. The philosophy and theory of medicine are making manifold efforts to capture the essence and normative implications of these concepts. In parallel, socio-empirical studies on patients’ understanding of their situation have yielded a comprehensive body of knowledge regarding subjective perspectives on health-related statuses. Although both scientific fields provide varied valuable insights, they have not been strongly linked to each other. Therefore, the article aims to scrutinise the normative-ethical implications of patient perspectives in building a bridge to the empirical ethics debates. Three potential fields of tension between the illness and the disease perspective are presented. Consequently, findings from empirical research examining patient perspectives on illness are displayed and the practical implications and associated ethical issues which arise are discussed. This leads to the conclusion that an explicit and elaborate empirical-ethical methodology is needed to deal appropriately with the complex interaction between patients’ views and the medico-professional view of disease. Kon’s four-stage model of normative-empirical collaboration is then applied against the background of empirical data on patient perceptions. Starting from this exemplary approach, the article suggests employing empirical-ethical frameworks for further research on the conceptual and normative issues, as they help to integrate perspectives from the philosophy of medicine with socio-empirical research. The combination of theoretical and empirical perspectives suggested contributes to a more nuanced discussion of the normative impact of patients’ actual understanding of illness. Further empirical research in this area would profit from explicitly considering potential ethical issues to avoid naturalistic fallacies or crypto-normative conclusions that may compromise healthcare practice. Vice versa, medico-theoretical debates could be enriched by integrating subjective views of those people who are immediately affected.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Empirical Ethics.Carlo Leget & Pascal Borry - 2010 - Ethical Perspectives 17 (2):231-252.
On the triad disease, illness and sickness.Bjørn Hofmann - 2002 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (6):651 – 673.
The Role of Empirical Research in Bioethics.Alexander A. Kon - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (6-7):59-65.
Empirical research on research ethics.Joan E. Sieber - 2004 - Ethics and Behavior 14 (4):397 – 412.
Empirical Research and Family Ethics.Annemie Dillen - 2010 - Ethical Perspectives 17 (2):283-307.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-01-10

Downloads
60 (#257,746)

6 months
14 (#154,299)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Anna-Henrikje Seidlein
University of Greifswald

References found in this work

Epistemic Injustice and Illness.Ian James Kidd & Havi Carel - 2016 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (2):172-190.
Epistemic Injustice in Healthcare: A Philosophical Analysis.Ian James Kidd & Havi Carel - 2014 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 17 (4):529-540.
Disease.Rachel Cooper - 2002 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 33 (2):263-282.

View all 43 references / Add more references