When four principles are too many: Bloodgate, integrity and an action-guiding model of ethical decision making in clinical practice

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 195-196

  Muirhead, William ^a  

^a LINCOLN COUNTY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BENEFICENCE; BIOETHICS; DECISION MAKING; ETHICAL THEORY; ETHICS; HUMAN; MEDICAL ETHICS; MORALITY; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

BENEFICENCE; BIOETHICS; DECISION MAKING; ETHICAL ANALYSIS; ETHICAL THEORY; ETHICS, CLINICAL; HUMANS; MORALS; PRINCIPLE-BASED ETHICS; PROFESSIONAL AUTONOMY; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

EID: 84860529598     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100136     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 5th edn. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
2. General Medical Council. Decision of the Fitness to Practise Panel concluding on 01 September 2010 which heard the case of Wendy Chapman. http://webcache.gmc-uk.org/minutesfiles/Chapman%203171037%20PUBLISHABLE%20Minutes%20Sept2010.doc (accessed 27 Oct 2011).
3. Clouser KD, Gert B. A critique of principlism. J Med Philos 1990;15:219-36.
4. Trans Thomson JAK. Aristotle The Nichomachean Ethics. Further revised edn. London: Penguin, 2004.
5. Gillon R. Ethics needs principlesdfour can encompass the restdand respect for autonomy should be "first among equals". J Med Ethics 2003;29:307-12.