Fiester Autumn M
Bioethics. 2015 Jun;29(5):309-15. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12115. Epub 2014 Sep 26.
Internationally, there is an on-going dialogue about how to professionalize ethics consultation services (ECSs). Despite these efforts, one aspect of ECS-competence that has received scant attention is the liability of failing to adequately capture all of the relevant moral considerations in an ethics conflict. This failure carries a high price for the least powerful stakeholders in the dispute. When an ECS does not possess a sophisticated dexterity at translating what stakeholders say in a conflict into ethical concepts or principles, it runs the risk of naming one side's claims as morally legitimate and decrying the other's as merely self-serving. The result of this failure is that one side in a dispute is granted significantly more moral weight and authority than the other. The remedy to this problem is that ECSs learn how to expand the diagnostic moral lens they employ in clinical ethics conflicts.
在国际上,关于如何使伦理咨询服务(ECS)专业化的讨论正在进行。尽管做出了这些努力,但伦理咨询服务能力的一个方面却很少受到关注,即未能在伦理冲突中充分考虑到所有相关道德因素所带来的责任。这种疏忽给纠纷中最弱势的利益相关者带来了高昂代价。当伦理咨询服务机构在将冲突中利益相关者的言论转化为伦理概念或原则时缺乏高超的技巧,就有可能将一方的主张视为道德上合理的,而谴责另一方仅仅是出于私利。这种疏忽的结果是,纠纷中的一方被赋予了比另一方更大的道德权重和权威。解决这个问题的方法是,伦理咨询服务机构要学会如何拓宽他们在临床伦理冲突中所使用的诊断性道德视角。