Requena Meana Pablo
Pontificia Università della Santa Croce.
Cuad Bioet. 2008 Jan-Apr;19(65):11-27.
The four prima facie principles proposed for bioethics by Beauchamp and Childress (principlism) has been one of the most followed bioethical paradigms, gaining a prominent place not only in United States, but in many other parts of the world. This model has been criticized from different points of view, especially in the last fifteen years. One of the major objections to principlism is the difficulty of applying the system to real bioethical dilemmas. The essential problem of the system, apart from an absence of hierarchy among the four principles, is an absence of a clear framework of human goods (anthropologically speaking) which are necessary to protect. Consequently, in the face of an ethical dilemma two opposite solutions can be reached using one principle or another. The authors offer as a solution to these difficulties the specification and consideration of the principles and rules. However, in many cases, this is not sufficient.
博尚和奇尔德雷斯提出的用于生物伦理学的四项初步原则(原则主义)一直是最受遵循的生物伦理范式之一,不仅在美国,而且在世界许多其他地区都占据显著地位。该模式受到了来自不同观点的批评,尤其是在过去十五年中。对原则主义的主要反对意见之一是将该体系应用于实际生物伦理困境的困难。该体系的根本问题,除了四项原则之间缺乏等级制度外,还在于缺乏一个明确的(从人类学角度讲)需要保护的人类利益框架。因此,面对伦理困境时,使用这一原则或那一原则可能会得出两种相反的解决方案。作者提出对原则和规则进行细化和考量来解决这些困难。然而,在许多情况下,这并不够。