Are physicians obligated always to act in the patient's best interests?

Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (2):66-70 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The principle that physicians should always act in the best interests of the present patient is widely endorsed. At the same time, and often within the same document, it is recognised that there are appropriate exceptions to this principle. Unfortunately, little, if any, guidance is provided regarding which exceptions are appropriate and how they should be handled. These circumstances might be tenable if the appropriate exceptions were rare. Yet, evaluation of the literature reveals that there are numerous exceptions, several of which pervade clinical medicine. This situation leaves physicians without adequate guidance on when to allow exceptions and how to address them, increasing the chances for unfairness in practice. The present article considers the range of exceptions, illustrates how the lack of guidance poses ethical concern and describes an alternative account of physician obligations to address this concern

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,867

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-13

Downloads
43 (#359,848)

6 months
9 (#437,808)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

The child's right to an open future.Joel Feinberg - 2006 - In Randall R. Curren (ed.), Philosophy of Education: An Anthology. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
The Limits of Morality.Michael Slote - 1991 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 51 (4):915-917.
The Doctor as Double Agent.Marcia Angell - 1993 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 3 (3):279-286.

View all 10 references / Add more references