Activities, not rules: The need for responsive practice (on the way toward responsibility)

American Journal of Bioethics

Volumn 1, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 54-

  Finder, Stuart G ^a   Bliton, Mark J ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS; ETHICIST; ETHICS; MEDICAL ETHICS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; STANDARD; TECHNIQUE;

BIOETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS;

ETHICISTS; ETHICS CONSULTATION; ETHICS, CLINICAL; METHODS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE;

EID: 85012450375     PISSN: 15265161     EISSN: 15360075     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/152651601317139441     Document Type: Article

References (6)

1. Agich, G. J. 2001. The question of method in ethics consultation. American Journal of Bioethics 1(4): 31-41.
2. Bliton, M. J., and S. G. Finder. 1996. The eclipse of the individual in policy (Where is the place for justice?) Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 5(4): 519-532.
3. Bliton, M. J 1999. Strange but not stranger: The peculiar visage of philosophy in clinical ethics consultation. Human Studies 22(1): 69-97.
4. Finder, S. G., and M. J. Bliton. 2001. Interplays of reflection and text: Telling the case. American Journal of Bioethics 1(1): 56-57.
5. Task Force on Standards for Bioethics Consultation. 1998. Core competencies for health care ethics consultation. Glenview: American Society for Bioethics and Humanities.
6. Zaner, R. M., ed. 1999. Performance, talk, reflection: What is going on in clinical ethics consultation? Dordrecht: Kluwer.