Literature DB >> 23632008

Ethics by opinion poll? The functions of attitudes research for normative deliberations in medical ethics.

Sabine Salloch1, Jochen Vollmann1, Jan Schildmann1.   

Abstract

Empirical studies on people's moral attitudes regarding ethically challenging topics contribute greatly to research in medical ethics. However, it is not always clear in which ways this research adds to medical ethics as a normative discipline. In this article, we aim to provide a systematic account of the different ways in which attitudinal research can be used for normative reflection. In the first part, we discuss whether ethical judgements can be based on empirical work alone and we develop a sceptical position regarding this point, taking into account theoretical, methodological and pragmatic considerations. As empirical data should not be taken as a direct source for normative justification, we then delineate different ways in which attitudes research can be combined with theoretical accounts of normative justification in the second part of the article. Firstly, the combination of attitudes research with normative-ethical theories is analysed with respect to three different aspects: (a) The extent of empirical data which is needed, (b) the question of which kind of data is required and (c) the ways in which the empirical data are processed within the framework of an ethical theory. Secondly, two further functions of attitudes research are displayed which lie outside the traditional focus of ethical theories: the exploratory function of detecting and characterising new ethical problems, and the field of 'moral pragmatics'. The article concludes with a methodological outlook and suggestions for the concrete practice of attitudinal research in medical ethics. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Demographic Surveys/Attitudes; Interests of Health Personnel/Institutions; Philosophical Ethics

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23632008     DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2012-101253

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  10 in total

1.  Fostering a prevention mindset for responsible gene editing.

Authors:  Karen M Meagher; Zubin Master
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2019-05-17       Impact factor: 2.622

2.  Consumers' Implicit Motivation Of Purchasing Luxury Brands: An EEG Study.

Authors:  Wuke Zhang; Jia Jin; Ailian Wang; Qingguo Ma; Haihong Yu
Journal:  Psychol Res Behav Manag       Date:  2019-09-25

Review 3.  Research participants' perceptions and views on consent for biobank research: a review of empirical data and ethical analysis.

Authors:  Flavio D'Abramo; Jan Schildmann; Jochen Vollmann
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2015-09-09       Impact factor: 2.652

4.  The normative background of empirical-ethical research: first steps towards a transparent and reasoned approach in the selection of an ethical theory.

Authors:  Sabine Salloch; Sebastian Wäscher; Jochen Vollmann; Jan Schildmann
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2015-04-04       Impact factor: 2.652

5.  A CRISPR New World: Attitudes in the Public toward Innovations in Human Genetic Modification.

Authors:  Steven M Weisberg; Daniel Badgio; Anjan Chatterjee
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2017-05-22

6.  Early Genital Surgery in Disorders/Differences of Sex Development: Patients' Perspectives.

Authors:  Elena Bennecke; Stephanie Bernstein; Peter Lee; Tim C van de Grift; Agneta Nordenskjöld; Marion Rapp; Margaret Simmonds; Jürg C Streuli; Ute Thyen; Claudia Wiesemann
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2021-03-12

7.  Research across the disciplines: a road map for quality criteria in empirical ethics research.

Authors:  Marcel Mertz; Julia Inthorn; Günter Renz; Lillian Geza Rothenberger; Sabine Salloch; Jan Schildmann; Sabine Wöhlke; Silke Schicktanz
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2014-03-01       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 8.  Lessons from HeLa Cells: The Ethics and Policy of Biospecimens.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 8.929

9.  Quality of life in a broader perspective: Does ASCOT reflect the capability approach?

Authors:  M S van Loon; K M van Leeuwen; R W J G Ostelo; J E Bosmans; G A M Widdershoven
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Are we ready for artificial intelligence health monitoring in elder care?

Authors:  Anita Ho
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2020-09-21       Impact factor: 3.921

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.