Johnson M
School of Human and Health Sciences, Huddersfield Polytechnic, Queensgate, West Yorkshire, England.
J Adv Nurs. 1990 Dec;15(12):1358-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1990.tb01776.x.
This paper argues that the current sources of material for the debate of moral questions in health care in general and nursing in particular, are inadequate. The current bases of nursing's knowledge and values are explored, and the conclusion drawn that reliance upon theory developed by other disciplines has led to theories which are wholly inappropriate to explain either how nursing is practised or even how it ought to be. A case is made that naturalistic sociological methods such as participant observation have the greatest possibilities to describe and explain moral conduct in nursing. Further, these methods can produce a view of reality more consistent with the experiences and feelings of the patients or clients and other health workers. It would seem that data and theory generated using this perspective could better inform the debates of moral philosophers than the currently dominant sources of their case material, the views of the medical and legal professions.
本文认为，当前用于医疗保健领域尤其是护理领域道德问题辩论的素材来源并不充足。文章探讨了护理知识和价值观的现有基础，并得出结论：依赖其他学科发展的理论导致了一些完全不适用于解释护理实践方式甚至护理应然方式的理论。有人提出，诸如参与观察等自然主义社会学方法最有可能描述和解释护理中的道德行为。此外，这些方法能够产生一种与患者或服务对象以及其他医护人员的经历和感受更为一致的现实观。与道德哲学家目前占主导地位的案例素材来源（医学和法律行业的观点）相比，从这一视角生成的数据和理论似乎能更好地为他们的辩论提供信息。
