Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 5th edn.
WEBBeauchamp T L, Childress J F. Oxford University Press, 2001, £19.95, pp 454. ISBN 0-19-514332-9. The Principles of Biomedical Ethics by Beauchamp and Childress is a classic in the field of medical ethics. The first edition was published in 1979 and “unleashed” the four principles of respect for autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and …
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? - Journal of …
WEBAbortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth ...
Why is informed consent important? - Journal of Medical Ethics
WEBDecision-making is a prominent theme in this edition of the Journal of Medical Ethics . Our feature article examines the relationship between trust and informed consent. Informed consent is, of course, central to the decision-making process in medicine. In addition, several articles consider decision-making in medicine from a variety of angles. In our feature article, Nir Eyal attacks attempts ...
Defending the four principles approach as a good basis for good …
WEBThis paper argues that the four prima facie principles—beneficence, non-maleficence, respect for autonomy and justice—afford a good and widely acceptable basis for ‘doing good medical ethics’. It confronts objections that the approach is simplistic, incompatible with a virtue-based approach to medicine, that it requires respect for autonomy always to have priority when the principles ...
Homepage | JME
WEBJournal of Medical Ethics is an official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics and a Plan S compliant Transformative Journal. JME features articles on ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and ...
Good reasons to vaccinate: mandatory or payment for risk?
WEBMandatory vaccination, including for COVID-19, can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives, and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are proportionate. I describe an algorithm for justified mandatory vaccination.
Principlism and moral dilemmas: a new principle - Journal of …
WEBMoral conflicts occur in theories that involve more than one principle. I examine basic ways of dealing with moral dilemmas in medical ethics and in ethics generally, and propose a different approach based on a principle I call the “mutuality principle”. It is offered as an addition to Tom Beauchamp and James Childress’ principlism. The principle calls for the mutual enhancement of basic ...
Methods and principles in biomedical ethics
WEBThe four principles approach to medical ethics plus specification is used in this paper. Specification is defined as a process of reducing the indeterminateness of general norms to give them increased action guiding capacity, while retaining the moral commitments in the original norm. Since questions of method are central to the symposium, the paper begins with four observations about method ...
WEBA4R is a practical decision- making framework for priority setting that has been used in various areas of healthcare to support fair resource allocation. It is a process- based rather than an outcomes- based framework, focusing on how decisions ought to be made rather than on the outcomes of those deci-sions.
The Mental Capacity Act 2005: a new framework for healthcare …
WEBThe Mental Capacity Act received Royal Assent on 7 April 2005, and it will be implemented in 2007. The Act defines when someone lacks capacity and it supports people with limited decision-making ability to make as many decisions as possible for themselves. The Act lays down rules for substitute decision making. Someone taking decisions on behalf of the person lacking capacity must act in the ...