The Limits of Principlism and Recourse to Theory: The Example of Telecare

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (4):369-382 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Principlism is the approach promoted by Beauchamp and Childress for addressing the ethics of medical practice. Instead of evaluating clinical decisions by means of full-scale theories from moral philosophy, Beauchamp and Childress refer people to four principles—of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. Now it is one thing for principlism to be invoked in an academic literature dwelling on a stock topic of medical ethical writing: end-of-life decisions, for example. It is another when the topic lies further from the mainstream. In such cases the cost of reaching for the familiar Beauchamp and Childress framework, with its formulaic set of concerns, may be to miss something morally important. After discussing an example of the sort of academic literature I have in mind, I propose to distinguish the uses of the formulaic from the uses of the more unapologetically theoretical in applied ethics, and to suggest that the latter can make up for some of the limitations of the former. This is not to say that the more theoretical literature has no limitations of its own, or that it should take the place of the formulaic. On the contrary, there is room in applied ethics and a use in applied ethics for both. But there is a sense in which there is a greater dependence of principlism on theory than the other way round, and at the end I try to spell out the significance of this fact.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,323

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 method of 'principlism': A critique of the critique.B. Andrew Lustig - 1992 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):487-510.
The Principlism Debate: A Critical Overview.Richard B. Davis - 1995 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (1):85-105.
Balancing Principles in Beauchamp and Childress.Tom Tomlinson - 1998 - The Paideia Archive: Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 4:191-196.
Global ethics and principlism.John-Stewart Gordon - 2011 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 21 (3):251-276.
Common morality: Comment on Beauchamp and Childress.Oliver Rauprich - 2008 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):43-71.
Defending principlism well understood.Michael Quante & Andreas Vieth - 2002 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (6):621 – 649.
Perseverations on a critical theme.B. Andrew Lustig - 1993 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 18 (5):491-502.


Added to PP

54 (#297,460)

6 months
9 (#317,373)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tom Sorell
University of Warwick

Citations of this work

Sound Trust and the Ethics of Telecare.Sander A. Voerman & Philip J. Nickel - 2017 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 42 (1):33-49.
Moral Theory and Theorizing in Health Care Ethics.Hugh Upton - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (4):431-443.

Add more citations

References found in this work

What we owe to each other.Thomas Scanlon - 1998 - Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 2002 - Mind 111 (442):323-354.
A defense of abortion.Judith Jarvis Thomson - 1971 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (1):47-66.

View all 9 references / Add more references