The many metaphysical commitments of secular clinical ethics: Expanding the argument for a moral-metaphysical proceduralism.


Journal

Bioethics
ISSN: 1467-8519
Titre abrégé: Bioethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8704792

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2022
Historique:
revised: 15 02 2022
received: 15 10 2021
accepted: 08 04 2022
pubmed: 10 5 2022
medline: 23 8 2022
entrez: 9 5 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The rich moral diversity of academic bioethics poses a paradox for the practice of giving moral recommendations in secular clinical ethics: How are ethicists to provide moral guidance in a pluralistic society? The field has responded to this challenge with a "procedural approach," but defining this term stirs debate. Some have championed a contentless proceduralism, where ethicists work only to help negotiate resolutions among stakeholders without making any moral recommendations. Others have defended a moral proceduralism by claiming that ethicists should make moral recommendations that are grounded in bioethical consensus (e.g., relevant law, policy, professional consensus statements, and bioethics literature), which is secured using moral principles such as respect for persons or justice. In contrast, we develop a moral-metaphysical proceduralism by identifying many metaphysical commitments in points of secular bioethical consensus. The moral-metaphysical view of secular clinical ethics is important because it challenges the discipline to accept the substantive philosophical foundations required to support giving moral recommendations in a pluralistic context, which may lead to further insights about the nature of the field.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35527699
doi: 10.1111/bioe.13046
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

783-793

Informations de copyright

© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Auteurs

Abram Brummett (A)

Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak Beaumont Hospital, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA.

Jason T Eberl (JT)

Albert Gnaegi Center for Health Care Ethics, Saint Louis University, St Louis, Missouri.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH