- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Moral Intimacy, Authority, and Discretion
American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):66-68 (2020)
Abstract
Volume 20, Issue 2, February 2020, Page 66-68.Author Profiles
My notes
Similar books and articles
On Surrogates’ Moral Authority: A Reply to Berger.Ryan K. Hubbard & Jake Greenblum - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):64-66.
Addressing the Perceived Duality of Represented and Unrepresented Patients: Legal Findings in a Moral Context.Paul S. Mueller, Erin S. DeMartino & Beau P. Sperry - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):49-50.
The Moral Distress of Patients and Families.Connie M. Ulrich - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (6):68-70.
Compassionate Care for the Unconscious and Incapacitated.Michael J. Young - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):55-57.
Redistributing Fair Subject Selection.Kirstin Borgerson - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):25-27.
Context is Needed When Assessing Fair Subject Selection.G. Owen Schaefer - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):20-22.
Decisional Humility and the Marginally Represented Patient.Barrie J. Huberman & Joseph J. Fins - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):51-53.
Risk Limits in Fair Subject Selection.Robert Steel - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):30-32.
Upstream Influences and Fair Subject Selection.Nancy S. Jecker - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):22-24.
Marginally Represented Patients, Best Interests, and Ends-in-Themselves.Peter Shiu-Hwa Tsu - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):57-59.
Analytics
Added to PP
2020-01-29
Downloads
22 (#700,182)
6 months
8 (#505,181)
2020-01-29
Downloads
22 (#700,182)
6 months
8 (#505,181)
Historical graph of downloads
Author Profiles
Citations of this work
Marginally Represented Patients and the Moral Authority of Surrogates.Jeffrey T. Berger - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (3):W1-W2.
When Parents Prefer to Defer: Is ‘Deferral’ Always Problematic in Pediatric Decision-Making?Bryanna Moore, Georgia Loutrianakis & Johnna Wellesley - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 22 (6):24-26.
When Clinicians Marginalize Decision-Makers.Ian D. Wolfe - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 22 (6):26-28.
References found in this work
Use of a Patient Preference Predictor to Help Make Medical Decisions for Incapacitated Patients.A. Rid & D. Wendler - 2014 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 39 (2):104-129.
Marginally Represented Patients and the Moral Authority of Surrogates.Jeffrey T. Berger - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):44-48.
Marginally Represented Patients and the Moral Authority of Surrogates.Jeffrey T. Berger - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (3):W1-W2.
Surrogate Decision Making in the Internet Age.Jessica Berg - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics 12 (10):28-33.
Should Artificial Intelligence Augment Medical Decision Making? The Case for an Autonomy Algorithm.Camillo Lamanna - 2018 - AMA Journal of Ethics 9 (20):E902-910.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-6686886f5-5pqs9 uwo