A formal Ethics Consultation Service (ECS) can provide significant help to patients, families and hospital staff. As with any other form of clinical consultation, documentation of the process and the advice rendered is very important. Upon review of the published consult documentation practices of other ECSs, we judged that none of them were sufficiently detailed or structured to meet the needs and purposes of a clinical ethics consultation. Thus, we decided to share our method in order to advance the practice (...) of ethics consultation. Here, we describe a method of ECS documentation practice, including use of a formal consult report template, as well as a log for maintaining a chronological record of the consultations performed. These two documents facilitate order and organisation of the ECS. They also enable the ECS to keep an account of professional time and experience, enable quick consult trend assessments (by consult theme or ward, for example) and establish a potential registry of consults for future research study. This method of documentation, we believe, not only contributes significantly to the primary purpose of the consultation—namely, the evincing and sharing of ethical opinion about a case—but also enables consultants to improve their practice and to pursue research on clinical ethics consultation. (shrink)

This book is about the ethical issues that clinicians encounter as they care for patients and is written to assist those who serve on hospital ethics committees as they deliberate about appropriate action in difficult ethical cases.

Bioethics represents a dramatic revision of the centuries-old professional ethics that governed the behavior of physicians and their relationships with patients. This venerable ethics code was challenged in the years after World War II by the remarkable advances in the biomedical sciences and medicine that raised questions about the definition of death, the use of life-support systems, organ transplantation, and reproductive interventions. In response, philosophers and theologians, lawyers and social scientists joined together with physicians and scientists to rethink and revise (...) the old standards. Governments established commissions to recommend policies. Courts heard arguments and legislatures passed laws. This book is the first broad history of the growing field of bioethics. Covering the period 1947-1987, it examines the origin and evolution of the debates over human experimentation, genetic engineering, organ transplantation, termination of life-sustaining treatment, and new reproductive technologies. It assesses the contributions of philosophy, theology, law and the social sciences to the expanding discourse of bioethics. Written by one of the field's founders, The Birth of Bioethics is based on extensive archival research into sources that are difficult to obtain and on interviews with many of the leading figures in the moral debates in medicine. A very readable and comprehensive account of the evolution of bioethics, this book stresses the history of ideas but does not neglect the social and cultural context and the people involved. It will serve the information needs of philosophers, ethicists, social historians, and everyone interested in the origins of some of today's most hotly debated issues. (shrink)

This book is about the ethical issues that clinicians encounter as they care for patients and is written to assist those who serve on hospital ethics committees as they deliberate about appropriate action in difficult ethical cases.

Introduction Watching the Doctor In some cultures, it is said, villagers cluster around a healer and a patient, eagerly listening to their conversation and ...

In this engaging study, the authors put casuistry into its historical context, tracing the origin of moral reasoning in antiquity, its peak during the sixteenth and early seventeenth century, and its subsequent fall into disrepute from the mid-seventeenth century.

Book reviewed in this article: Clinical Ethics: A Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine. By Albert R. Jonsen, Mark Siegler, and William J. Winslade.

The essays in this Special Section are about the ethics of Commercialism in Medicine. They are written, for the most part, by bioethicists, with the support of several prominent physicians and a health policy lawyer. This journal is, of course, devoted to ethics. Thus, our intent is to subject the question of commercialism in medicine to ethical scrutiny. Much has been written about commercialism in healthcare but very little about the ethics of commercialism in healthcare. One of our authors, Dr. (...) Jerome Kassirer, has encouraged a national dialogue about these issues. We hope to start that dialogue in the bioethical community and, through that community, into the nation. (shrink)

Many years ago, the esteemed patriarch of bioethics, Joseph Fletcher, spoke loud and clear in favor of rationality in reproduction. By rationality, he meant not merely limiting population growth, which he certainly favored, but bringing to bear human analytic and creative intelligence on the random and instinctive activities of sexual intercourse and procreation that we share with all mammals. In his 1974 book, The Ethics of Genetic Control: Ending Reproductive Roulette, he foresaw most of the issues that we are facing (...) today. He reflected on artificial insemination, prenatal diagnosis, cloning, eugenics, ectogenesis, ovum transfers, and genetic engineering. He examined these innovations to the extent that he felt that each of them represents a way of exercising rational and responsible control over life and reproduction. The subtitle of his book, “Ending Reproductive Roulette,” proclaims his faith. Dr. Fletcher's dedication to rationality led him to make the astonishing statement, “Man is a maker and the more rationally contrived and deliberate anything is, the more human it is. Therefore, laboratory reproduction is radically human compared to conception by ordinary heterosexual intercourse.”. (shrink)

Part III: Now presents solely, clinical ethics. --.

Book reviewed in this article: The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning. By Albert R. Jonsen and Stephen Toulmin.

A physician says, "I have an ethical obligation never to cause the death of a patient," another responds, "My ethical obligation is to relieve pain even if the patient dies." The current argument over the role of physicians in assisting patients to die constantly refers to the ethical duties of the profession. References to the Hippocratic Oath are often heard. Many modern problems, from assisted suicide to accessible health care, raise questions about the traditional ethics of medicine and the medical (...) profession. However, few know what the traditional ethics are and how they came into being. This book provides a brief tour of the complex story of medical ethics evolved over centuries in both Western and Eastern culture. It sets this story in the social and cultural contexts in which the work of healing was practiced and suggests that, behind the many different perceptions about the ethical duties of physicians, certain themes appear constantly, and may be relevant to modern debates. The book begins with the Hippocratic medicine of ancient Greece, moves through the Middle Ages, Renaissance and Enlightenment in Europe, and the long history of Indian and Chinese medicine, ending as the problems raised modern medical science and technology challenge the settled ethics of the long tradition. (shrink)

Whether ethics is too important to be left to the experts or so important that it must be is an age-old question. The emergence of clinical ethicists raises it again, as a question about professionalism. What role clinical ethicists should play in healthcare decision making – teacher, mediator, or consultant – is a question that has generated considerable debate but no consensus.

Casuistry is a traditional method of interpreting and resolving moral problems. It focuses on the circumstances of particular cases rather than on the application of ethical theories and principles. After a brief history of casuistry, the method is explained and its relation to theory and principles is discussed.

This essay focuses on how casuistry can become a useful technique of practical reasoning for the clinical ethicist or ethics consultant. Casuistry is defined, its relationship to rhetorical reasoning and its interpretation of cases, by employing three terms that, while they are not employed by the classical rhetoricians and casuists, conform, in a general way, to the features of their work. Those terms are (1) morphology, (2) taxonomy, (3) kinetics. The morphology of a case reveals the invariant structure of the (...) particular case whatever its contingent features, and also the invariant forms of argument relevant to any case of the same sort: these invariant features can be called topics. Taxonomy situates the instant case in a series of similar cases, allowing the similarities and differences between an instant case and a paradigm case to dictate the moral judgment about the instant case. This judgment is based, not merely on application of an ethical theory or principle, but upon the way in which circumstances and maxims appear in the morphology of the case itself and in comparison with other cases. Kinetics is an understanding of the way in which one case imparts a kind of moral movement to other cases, that is, different and sometimes unprecedented circumstances may move certain marginal or exceptional cases to the level of paradigm cases. In conclusion, casuistry is the exercise of prudential or practical reasoning in recognition of the relationship between maxims, circumstances and topics, as well as the relationship of paradigms to analogous cases. (shrink)

What has moral theory to do with practical judgment? The practical ethicist can move by analogy from case to case, saying of most new cases, “Oh, I think I've been here before.” Theory, ascending to a broader view, can provide directions when the ethicist finds herself in unfamiliar territory.

“Bioethics began in religion, but religion has faded from bioethics.” This interpretation is commonplace among many who have an opinion on bioethics. This chapter examines this.

The era of replacing human organs and their functions began with chronic dialysis and renal transplantation in the 1960s. These significant medical advances brought unprecedented problems. Among these, the selection of patients for a scarce resource was most troubling. In Seattle, where dialysis originated, a “God Committee” selected which patients would live and die. The debates over such a committee stimulated the origins of bioethics.

This is the God Squad. It is faceless, impersonal, unmoved by tragedy, almost terrorist in aspect. The photo appeared in LIFE magazine on November 9, 1962, and it depicted the Admissions and Policy Committee of the Seattle Artificial Kidney Center. The Committee had been established in 1962 to select those few persons who would be admitted to the new and tiny dialysis unit that was created by Dr. Belding Scribner, inventor of the arteriovenous shunt. It consisted of seven anonymous members (...) – a minister, a lawyer, a businessman, a homemaker, a labor leader, and two physicians. Each month they received a pile of charts about persons with end-stage renal disease. A prior medical evaluation had rated them all medically suitable for dialysis. The Committee’s task was to select one or two out of a dozen or so to take the available spots. The others were left to die. After several years of this agonizing work, the amendments to the Social Security Act provided financial support for renal dialysis and transplant, allowing the Admission Committee some peace of mind. (shrink)

Dr. Jonson, Professor of Medical Ethics at the University of California, San Francisco, was a member of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, and is currently a member of the President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and in Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Mr. Yesley practices law in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and was the staff director of the National Commission. This article is reprinted from Medicolegal News with permission (...) from the American Society of Law and Medicine, © 1980. (shrink)

In September 1994, theNew York Timescarried a front page article declaring healthcare reform dead in Congress. The obituary on healthcare followed a Congressional decision not to pursue the issue further in 1994. Although Congress and the President will likely revisit healthcare reform during 1995, the choices may be between various incremental steps, rather than substantive changes to bring about universal coverage.

A member of the two federal advisory panels on artificial hearts reflects that the nuclear‐powered artificial heart, had it been developed, would have posed a physical threat to others. Today's artificial heart poses a different threat. Because of the high costs, many people may be deprived of access to other forms of medical care and other social goods.

In 1991 and 1992, citizens of Washington State and California voted on whether "aid-in-dying" should be legalized. In both states, the proposition was defeated. In this article, the author, who participated in the Washington State campaign, imagines what might have happened in the fictitious State of Redwood, had such a proposal passed. Keywords: active euthanasia, aid-in-dying, assisted suicide CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?

The article by Baker and McCullough in this issue posits that bioethics has generally applied moral theories to practical problems. They propose that, rather than this "application," bioethicists should "appropriate" aspects of ethical theory. This article disagrees that bioethical writing is primary "application." It agrees that "appropriation" is the most suitable approach to bioethical analysis but claims that the description of appropriation provided by Baker and McCullough is inadequate. It must be supplemented by the rhetorical concept of "invention.".

“Strangers at the Benchside: Research Ethics Consulation” (Cho et al. 2008) proposes what is probably a good idea. Early scrutiny of the ethical dimensions of emerging science seems sensible—at lea...

The famous first aphorism of Hippocrates, "Life is short, the art is long" was long considered a perfect summary of medical ethics. Modern physicians find the words impossible to understand. But it can be interpreted as a fundamental insight into the ethical problems of modern medicine. The technology of modern scientific medicine can sustain life, even when life is losing its vitality. How should decisions be made about the use of technology and by whom? This is the incessant question of (...) modern medical ethics. (shrink)

Ethics consultation, while often a process of negotiation between diverse opinions, sometimes requires deeper moral inquiry. The form of such inquiry is suggested by classical casuistry and its attendant doctrine of probabilism.

Bioethics Beyond the Headlines is a primer in bioethics. You will not find convoluted philosophical arguments in this volume. Rather, you will find an engaging sampling of the key questions in bioethics, including euthanasia, assisted reproduction, cloning and stem cells, neuroscience, access to healthcare, and even research on animals and questions of environmental ethics—areas typically overlooked in general introductions to bioethics.

Dr. Jonson, Professor of Medical Ethics at the University of California, San Francisco, was a member of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, and is currently a member of the President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and in Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Mr. Yesley practices law in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and was the staff director of the National Commission. This article is reprinted from Medicolegal News with permission (...) from the American Society of Law and Medicine, © 1980. (shrink)

The advent and growth of bioethics in the United States in the late 1960s and early 1970s precipitated an era of public moral discourse, that is, the deliberate attempt to analyze and formulate moral argument for use in public policy. The language for rational discussion of moral matters evolved from the parent disciplines of moral philosophy and theological ethics, as well as from the idioms of a secular, pluralistic world that was searching for policy answers to difficult bioethical questions. This (...) article explores the basis and content of the unique contributions of both theological and philosophical ethics to the development of public moral discourse. (shrink)

The profession of medicine has developed codes of ethical conduct for thousands of years. From the Hippocratic Oath of ancient Greece onward to modern times, a universal and central element of such codes has expressed the imperative that a physician shall “Do no harm.”.

These last words are titled “Conclusion,” but they should be “Inception.” Professor Jacob Needleman encourages a vigorous conversation about commercialism in medicine. An honest conversation, he maintains, will spur understanding, indignation, and reformation. We do sincerely hope that such a conversation begins and is carried on to meaningful change. However, as the essays in this collection show, that conversation must take place in many different places and about many different things. All of our authors acknowledge that the problem of commercialism (...) is extremely complex. It cannot be understood as a simple fact or a single feature of modern healthcare. Thus, the conversation that discusses it must be varied and diverse. (shrink)