Veatch R M
Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC 20057.
J Med Philos. 1991 Aug;16(4):427-45. doi: 10.1093/jmp/16.4.427.
For years analysts have recognized the error of assuming that experts in medical science are also experts in deciding the clinically correct course for patients. This paper extends the analysis of the use of the consensus of experts to their use in public policy groups such as NIH Consensus Development panels. After arguing that technical experts cannot be expected to be expert on public policy decisions, the author extends the criticism to the use of the consensus of experts in estimating facts to provide a basis for policy decisions. It is argued that to the extent that (a) experts' views regarding a body of facts can be expected to correlate with their values relevant to those facts; and (b) the values of experts differ from the values of lay people, even the estimates of the facts given by the consensus of expert panels can be expected to differ from the estimates lay people would have given had they had the relevant scientific expertise.
多年来,分析人士已经认识到这样一个错误:假定医学专家在为患者决定临床正确治疗方案方面也是专家。本文将对专家共识的应用分析扩展到其在诸如美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)共识发展小组等公共政策团体中的应用。在论证了不能期望技术专家成为公共政策决策方面的专家之后,作者将批评扩展到在估计事实以提供政策决策依据时对专家共识的使用。有人认为,在以下程度上:(a)可以预期专家对一系列事实的看法与其与这些事实相关的价值观相关联;以及(b)专家的价值观与外行的价值观不同,那么即使专家小组共识给出的事实估计也可能与外行如果拥有相关科学专业知识时给出的估计不同。