The Concise Argument

Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (4):217-218 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This issue of the Journal of Medical covers a range of ethical issues and care settings making the task of beginning to summarise these papers challenging. They reflect the diversity of our field, representing different branches of bioethics focussing on specific areas or topics using a variety of methodologies: but how do we categorise these branches of bioethics? What demarks one branch from another? And what function do such categorisations fulfil? From the early days of medical ethics we now have a growing proliferation of different branches, from those with a more specific focus: clinical ethics, global ethics, nursing ethics, public health ethics for example, to a widening out, in terms of bioethics becoming the broader usage and medical ethics sitting within that. More recently, a new area of ethical focus has arisen, One Health, the subject of Johnson and Degeling’s article in this issue. They define One Health as follows: ‘One Health is generally construed as an integrated approach to understanding and managing disease. Although primarily associated with the prevention and control of Emerging Infectious Diseases, the approach is also relevant to dealing with endemic and zoonotic animal diseases, as well as securing food safety. In its most comprehensive form, it extends to fostering the health of humans, animals and their shared environments.’ This raises, in many ways, a different set of ethical concerns from those usually encountered in bioethics and medical ethics and this leads Johnson and Degeling to ask whether One Health merits having its own ‘ethical framework’. They use ethical frameworks in two senses: as value neutral deliberative tools and as embodying values, and consider how each usage could be applied in One Health. In terms of the first usage they state: ‘When ethical frameworks are regarded as a procedural tool then, the One Health perspective can broaden …

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,045

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The concise argument.Søren Holm - 2010 - Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (4):193-193.
The concise argument.Søren Holm - 2010 - Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (9):515-515.
The concise argument.W. E. Cayley Jr - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (1):1-1.
The concise argument.Sarah Chan - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (10):589-589.
The concise argument.Lucy Frith - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (1):1-2.
The concise argument.Søren Holm - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (9):525-525.
The concise argument: the importance of consent and choice.John McMillan - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (5):285-286.
The concise argument.Søren Holm - 2010 - Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (10):577-577.
Does One Health require a novel ethical framework?Jane Johnson & Chris Degeling - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (4):239-243.
The concise argument.Søren Holm - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (3):129-129.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-03-23

Downloads
27 (#578,242)

6 months
12 (#304,552)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Lucy Frith
University of Liverpool

References found in this work

Who needs bioethicists?Hallvard Lillehammer - 2003 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 35 (1):131-144.

Add more references