Suppr超能文献

专业知识、伦理专业知识与临床伦理会诊:实现术语明晰

Expertise, Ethics Expertise, and Clinical Ethics Consultation: Achieving Terminological Clarity.

作者信息

Iltis Ana S, Sheehan Mark

机构信息

Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA The Ethox Center, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA The Ethox Center, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

出版信息

J Med Philos. 2016 Aug;41(4):416-33. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhw014. Epub 2016 Jun 2.

Abstract

The language of ethics expertise has become particularly important in bioethics in light of efforts to establish the value of the clinical ethics consultation (CEC), to specify who is qualified to function as a clinical ethics consultant, and to characterize how one should evaluate whether or not a person is so qualified. Supporters and skeptics about the possibility of ethics expertise use the language of ethics expertise in ways that reflect competing views about what ethics expertise entails. We argue for clarity in understanding the nature of expertise and ethics expertise. To be an ethics expert, we argue, is to be an expert in knowing what ought to be done. Any attempt to articulate expertise with respect to knowing what ought to be done must include an account of ethics that specifies the nature of moral truth and the means by which we access this truth or a theoretical account of ethics such that expertise in another domain is linked to knowing or being better at judging what ought to be done and the standards by which this "knowing" or "being better at judging" is determined. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of our analysis for the literature on ethics expertise in CEC. We do think that there are clear domains in which a clinical ethics consultant might be expert but we are skeptical about the possibility that this includes ethics expertise. Clinical ethics consultants should not be referred to as ethics experts.

摘要

鉴于为确立临床伦理咨询(CEC)的价值、明确谁有资格担任临床伦理顾问以及描述应如何评估一个人是否具备此资格所做的努力,伦理专业知识的语言在生物伦理学中变得尤为重要。支持和怀疑伦理专业知识可能性的人使用伦理专业知识的语言方式,反映了对伦理专业知识内涵的相互竞争的观点。我们主张在理解专业知识和伦理专业知识的本质时保持清晰。我们认为,成为一名伦理专家就是成为一名知道应该做什么的专家。任何试图阐明关于知道应该做什么的专业知识的尝试,都必须包括一种伦理说明,该说明明确道德真理的本质以及我们获取这一真理的方式,或者一种伦理理论说明,使得在另一个领域的专业知识与知道或更善于判断应该做什么以及确定这种“知道”或“更善于判断”的标准联系起来。我们最后讨论了我们的分析对CEC中伦理专业知识文献的影响。我们确实认为在某些明确的领域,临床伦理顾问可能是专家,但我们对这其中包括伦理专业知识的可能性持怀疑态度。临床伦理顾问不应被称为伦理专家。

相似文献

1
Expertise, Ethics Expertise, and Clinical Ethics Consultation: Achieving Terminological Clarity.
J Med Philos. 2016 Aug;41(4):416-33. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhw014. Epub 2016 Jun 2.
2
Clinical Ethics Consultants are not "Ethics" Experts-But They do Have Expertise.
J Med Philos. 2016 Aug;41(4):384-400. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhw012. Epub 2016 Jun 14.
3
The "Ethics" Expertise in Clinical Ethics Consultation.
J Med Philos. 2016 Aug;41(4):363-8. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhw013. Epub 2016 Jun 3.
5
6
Sources of bias in clinical ethics case deliberation.
J Med Ethics. 2014 Oct;40(10):678-82. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101604. Epub 2013 Sep 18.
8
Balancing the perspectives. The patient's role in clinical ethics consultation.
Med Health Care Philos. 2003;6(3):247-54. doi: 10.1023/a:1025973902447.
9
Ethics consultants and ethics committees.
Arch Intern Med. 1989 May;149(5):1109-12.
10
Models of Ethics Consultation Used by Canadian Ethics Consultants: A Qualitative Study.
HEC Forum. 2016 Dec;28(4):273-282. doi: 10.1007/s10730-015-9299-z.

引用本文的文献

1
Moral expertise without moral elitism.
Bioethics. 2023 Jul;37(6):564-574. doi: 10.1111/bioe.13034. Epub 2022 Apr 11.
2
Philosophers in research ethics committees-what do they think they're doing? An empirical-ethical analysis.
Med Health Care Philos. 2021 Dec;24(4):609-619. doi: 10.1007/s11019-021-10044-1. Epub 2021 Aug 16.
5
Reasoning "Uncharted Territory": Notions of Expertise Within Ethics Review Panels Assessing Research Use of Social Media.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020 Feb-Apr;15(1-2):28-39. doi: 10.1177/1556264619837088. Epub 2019 Dec 12.
6
The Place for Religious Content in Clinical Ethics Consultations: A Reply to Janet Malek.
HEC Forum. 2019 Dec;31(4):305-323. doi: 10.1007/s10730-019-09382-8.
8
The "Ethics" Expertise in Clinical Ethics Consultation.
J Med Philos. 2016 Aug;41(4):363-8. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhw013. Epub 2016 Jun 3.

本文引用的文献

2
The "difficult" patient reconceived: an expanded moral mandate for clinical ethics.
Am J Bioeth. 2012;12(5):2-7. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2012.665135.
3
An ethics expertise for clinical ethics consultation.
J Law Med Ethics. 2011 Winter;39(4):649-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2011.00632.x.
4
Are moral philosophers moral experts?
Bioethics. 2010 May;24(4):153-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00691.x.
5
A new rejection of moral expertise.
Med Health Care Philos. 2005;8(3):273-9. doi: 10.1007/s11019-005-1588-x.
6
The possibility of ethical expertise.
Theor Med. 1994 Mar;15(1):61-75. doi: 10.1007/BF00999220.
7
In defence of clinical bioethics.
J Med Ethics. 1982 Sep;8(3):122-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.8.3.122.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验