Literature DB >> 31647762

Taxonomizing Views of Clinical Ethics Expertise.

Abram Brummett1, Erica K Salter2.   

Abstract

Our aim in this article is to bring some clarity to the clinical ethics expertise debate by critiquing and replacing the taxonomy offered by the Core Competencies report. The orienting question for our taxonomy is: Can clinical ethicists offer justified, normative recommendations for active patient cases? Views that answer "no" are characterized as a "negative" view of clinical ethics expertise and are further differentiated based on (a) why they think ethicists cannot give justified normative recommendations and (b) what they think ethicists can offer, if they cannot offer recommendations. Views that answer "yes" to the orienting question are characterized as a "positive" view of clinical ethics expertise. Positive views are distinguished according to four additional questions. First (P1), how are those recommendations generated? Second (P2), what is the nature of the recommendations? Third (P3), we ask, how are the recommendations justified? And finally (P4), how are the recommendations communicated?

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical ethics consultation; ethics committees; ethics expertise; moral theory

Year:  2019        PMID: 31647762     DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2019.1665729

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Bioeth        ISSN: 1526-5161            Impact factor:   11.229


  1 in total

1.  Is there a need for a clear advice? A retrospective comparative analysis of ethics consultations with and without recommendations in a maximum-care university hospital.

Authors:  Dagmar Schmitz; Dominik Groß; Roman Pauli
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 2.652

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.