Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2020 Jul;29(3):404-420. doi: 10.1017/S0963180120000146.
This paper challenges the long-standing and widely accepted view that medical ethics is nothing more than common morality applied to clinical matters. It argues against Tom Beauchamp and James Childress's four principles; Bernard Gert, K. Danner Clouser and Charles Culver's ten rules; and Albert Jonsen, Mark Siegler, and William Winslade's four topics approaches to medical ethics. First, a negative argument shows that common morality does not provide an account of medical ethics and then a positive argument demonstrates why the medical profession requires its own distinctive ethics. The paper also provides a way to distinguish roles and professions and an account of the distinctive duties of medical ethics. It concludes by emphasizing ways in which the uncommon morality approach to medical ethics is markedly different from the common morality approach.
本文质疑了长期以来广泛接受的观点，即医学伦理学只不过是将普通道德应用于临床问题。本文反对汤姆·比彻姆和詹姆斯·恰尔德斯的四项原则；伯纳德·格特、K·丹纳·克劳瑟和查尔斯·卡尔弗的十条规则；以及艾伯特·琼森、马克·西格勒和威廉·温斯莱德的医学伦理学四个主题方法。首先，一个否定的论点表明，普通道德并不能解释医学伦理学，然后一个积极的论点证明了为什么医学专业需要自己独特的伦理学。本文还提供了一种区分角色和职业的方法，并解释了医学伦理学的独特职责。最后，本文强调了医学伦理学的非普通道德方法与普通道德方法的显著不同。
