Beneficence in general practice: an empirical investigation

Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (5):388-393 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To study and report the attitudes of patients and general practitioners (GPs) concerning the obligation of doctors to act for the good of their patients, and to provide a practical account of beneficence in general practice. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews administered to GPs and patients. SETTING AND SAMPLE: Participants randomly recruited from an age and gender stratified list of GPs in a geographically defined region of South Australia. The sample comprised twenty-one general practitioners and seventeen patients recruited by participating GPs. RESULTS: In practice, acting for the good of the patient not only accommodates the views of patients and GPs on expertise and knowing best, but also responds to the particular details of the clinical situation. Patients had a complex understanding of the expertise necessary for medical practice, describing a contextual domain in which they were expert, and which complemented the scientific expertise of their GPs. General practitioners identified multiple sources for their expertise, of which experience was the most significant. The role of the GP included responding to individual patients and particular clinical problems and ranged from the assumption of responsibility through to the proffering of medical advice. CONCLUSION: This study found that GPs acting for the good of their patients covered a variety of GP actions and patient preferences. Beneficence was not justified by presumed patient vulnerability or the inability of patients to understand medical problems, but furthered through a recognition of the different areas of expertise contributed by both parties to the consultation

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,703

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

Assessing the value of transgenic crops.Hugh Lacey - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):497-511.
Practical ethics for general practice.Wendy A. Rogers - 2004 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Annette J. Braunack-Mayer.
Epistemology and empirical investigation.Kristoffer Ahlstrom - 2008 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 76 (1):109-134.
The simplicity of theories: Its degree and form. [REVIEW]James W. McAllister - 1991 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 22 (1):1-14.
Dignity promotion and beneficence.Diego S. Silva - 2010 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (4):365-372.
Is General Beneficence Inappropriately Demanding?Eric Palmer - 1994 - Southwest Philosophy Review 10 (2):85-105.
Procreative beneficence – cui Bono?Jakob Elster - 2009 - Bioethics 25 (9):482-488.
Moral particularism.Brad Hooker & Margaret Olivia Little (eds.) - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
For the patient's good: the restoration of beneficence in health care.Edmund D. Pellegrino - 1988 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by David C. Thomasma.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-13

Downloads
29 (#468,867)

6 months
3 (#434,103)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Wendy A. Rogers
Macquarie University

References found in this work

Principles of biomedical ethics.Tom L. Beauchamp - 1979 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by James F. Childress.
Ethics.William Frankena - 1967 - Philosophy of Science 34 (1):74-74.
Handbook of Qualitative Research.N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln - 1994 - British Journal of Educational Studies 42 (4):409-410.

View all 6 references / Add more references