In this paper I examine the epistemology and ethics of consensus, focusing on the ways in which decision makers use/misuse ethical expertise. The major questions I raise and tentative answers I give are the following: First, are the ‘experts’ really experts? My tentative answer is that they are bona fide experts who often represent specific interest groups. Second, is the experts' authority merely epistemological or is it also ethical? My tentative answer is that the experts' authority consists not only in (...) their command over specific matters of fact and/or value, but also in their ability to achieve ‘consensus’ about what is ‘true’/‘false’, or ‘right’/‘wrong’. Third, should the authority of expertise be limited? My tentative answer is that it should be limited in the area of facts but especially in the area of values. Persons who are ethics ‘experts’ must be particularly careful to practice an ethics of persuasion rather than an ethics of compulsion . Their role is not to force their group consensus upon decision makers' individual moral perceptions and deliberations; rather it is to help decision makers come to their own conclusions about what they ought to do. Keywords: authority of expertise, consensus, ethics committees, ethics of persuasion, NIH consensus development conferences CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this? (shrink)

Hospital ethics committees (HECs) have historically been instituted top-down, often ignoring the needs of the professionals and patients who might use their services. Seventy-four physicians and 123 nurses participated in a hospital-wide needs assessment designed to [1] identify their perceptions of the functions of the HEC, [2] determine which services and educational programs were most desired, and [3] explore which forums were most preferred for discussion of ethical problems. Results indicated that utilization of the HEC focused around five areas of (...) concern: withdrawing/withholding treatment, rationing and control of health care, children's rights, role of the patient and family in decisionmaking, and disagreements about treatment. Physicians and nurses differed widely in their attitudes. Perceptions about the appropriate functions of the HEC strongly influenced decisions regarding which HEC services to use. Needs assessment can play an important role in developing HEC goals and designing programs that meet the needs of professionals. (shrink)

The most important issue remains: Whether attorneys should serve on HECs? Will they tend to inhibit the development of other discussions, ethical discussions, regarding the issues brought before the HEC? D. Niemira (17, p. 982) suggests that what a hospital needs is not necessarily an attorney to help in their ethical deliberations, but an ethicist. This suggestion should receive further analysis. What types of ethical deliberations to which attorneys have not been exposed in their legal training are important given the (...) broader attorney-role (beyond giving legal opinion) in HEC discussions?The pro-active attorney faces many challenges, both in the current setting (as cases are brought to the HEC) and as future questions are raised (due to innovations in medical technology). These questions remain unclarified by the courts. The nature of the attorney's role is ever challenging; he or she remains in a key position that is currently needed (regarding the uncharted areas of HEC decisionmaking) and important for the future (as new cases emerge and require extensive deliberations). (shrink)