American Journal of Bioethics 19 (11):89-91 (2019)

Parker Crutchfield
Western Michigan University School Of Medicine
Brummett and Salter propose a useful and timely taxonomy of clinical ethics expertise (2019). As the field becomes further “professionalized” this taxonomy is important, and the core of it is right. It needs some refinement around the edges, however. In their conclusion, Brummett and Salter rightly point out that there is a significant difference between the ethicist whose recommendations are procedure- and process-heavy, consensus-driven, and dialogical and the authoritarian ethicist whose recommendations flow from “private moral views” (Brummett and Salter, 2019). This admission doesn’t go far enough. Brummett and Salter’s taxonomy fails to capture the notion that offering recommendations whose normative force is moral is different in kind from recommendations whose normative force is non-moral, such as those recommendations that are free of moral content or justified by convention. The difference is in kind, not scale. I argue further that clinical ethics expertise, if possible, consists at least in offering recommendations whose normative force is moral. These two claims imply that the taxonomy fails to cut clinical ethics expertise at the joints: the ethicist who offers justified non-moral normative recommendations is a different kind of ethicist from the one who offers justified moral normative recommendations, yet both are categorized as clinical ethics experts. I finish by offering a refinement of the taxonomy that more precisely categorizes clinical ethicists.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/15265161.2019.1665733
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Personal Knowledge.Michael Polanyi - 1958 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Taxonomizing Views of Clinical Ethics Expertise.Erica K. Salter & Abram Brummett - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (11):50-61.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

An Ethics Expertise for Clinical Ethics Consultation.Lisa M. Rasmussen - 2011 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 39 (4):649-661.
Why Moral Expertise Needs Moral Theory.Michael Cholbi - 2018 - In Jamie Carlin Watson & Laura K. Guidry-Grimes (eds.), Moral Expertise: New Essays from Theoretical and Clinical Bioethics. Springer International Publishing. pp. 71-86.
Debating Ethical Expertise.Norbert L. Steinkamp, Bert Gordijn & Henk A. . M. . J. Ten Have - 2008 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (2):173-192.
Dealing with the Normative Dimension in Clinical Ethics Consultation.Stella Reiter-Theil - 2009 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 18 (4):347.
Moral Experts, Deference & Disagreement.Jonathan Matheson, Nathan Nobis & Scott McElreath - 2018 - In Nathan Nobis, Scott McElreath & Jonathan Matheson (eds.), Moral Expertise. Springer Verlag.


Added to PP index

Total views
214 ( #52,485 of 2,499,037 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #32,464 of 2,499,037 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes