Relevant bibliographies by topics / Beauchamp and Childress

Contents

  1. Journal articles
  2. Dissertations / Theses
  3. Books
  4. Book chapters

Academic literature on the topic 'Beauchamp and Childress'

Author: Grafiati
Published: 4 June 2021
Last updated: 6 February 2022

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Beauchamp and Childress.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Journal articles on the topic "Beauchamp and Childress"

1

Shea, Matthew. "Forty Years of the Four Principles: Enduring Themes from Beauchamp and Childress." Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine 45, no. 4-5 (July 29, 2020): 387–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhaa020.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract This special issue commemorates the 40th anniversary of Tom Beauchamp and James Childress’s Principles of Biomedical Ethics with a collection of original essays addressing some of the major themes in the book. It opens with intellectual autobiographies by Beauchamp and Childress themselves. Subsequent articles explore the topics of common morality, specification and balancing of moral principles, virtue, moral status, autonomy, and lists of bioethical principles. The issue closes with a reply by Beauchamp and Childress to the other authors.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Rolf, Sibylle. "Respekt vor Patientenautonomie und Achtung der Menschenwürde." Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik 52, no. 3 (August 1, 2008): 200–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.14315/zee-2008-0306.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract The study investigates the »Four Principles of Biomedical Ethics« published by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress (1979, 52001) with a particular concern for the principle of respect for autonomy. The leading question is in which philosophical background autonomy is dealt with by Beauchamp/Childress and by the enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant, while the more emipirical theoretical framework of Beauchamp/Childress and the rationalistic framework of Kant are being analyzed. After having considered the foundation of autonomy both in Beauchamp/Childress and Kant, the study turns to the relationship of autonomy and human dignity by exploring the implicit extension of autonomy, human dignity and being human, and asks which consequences have to be drawn from a theological point of view.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Trotter, Griffin. "The Authority of the Common Morality." Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine 45, no. 4-5 (July 29, 2020): 427–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhaa015.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract In the third and subsequent editions of Principles of Biomedical Ethics, Tom Beauchamp and James Childress articulate a series of ethical norms that they regard as “derived” from, and hence carrying, the “authority” of the common morality. Although Beauchamp and Childress do not claim that biomedical norms they derive from the common morality automatically become constituents of the common morality, or that every detail of their account carries the authority of the common morality, they regard these derived norms as provisionally binding in a way that does not apply to the norms of mere “particular” moralities. Whereas particular moralities “do not bind other persons or communities,” Beauchamp and Childress have designed the norms of Principles of Biomedical Ethics to be “extensions” of the common morality that universally binds other persons and communities. Beauchamp and Childress seem to hold that (1) the norms they articulate in Principles of Biomedical Ethics are derived in an objective way from the common morality, and also that by virtue of being so derived (2) they carry a moral authority that objectively exceeds the authority of norms constituting particular moralities. My thesis in this essay is that both of these claims are false.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Rauprich, Oliver. "Common morality: comment on Beauchamp and Childress." Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29, no. 1 (January 2008): 43–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11017-008-9061-5.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Garcia, Jorge L. A. "Virtues and Principles in Biomedical Ethics." Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine 45, no. 4-5 (July 29, 2020): 471–503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhaa013.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract In the seventh and most recent edition of their classic book, Principles of Biomedical Ethics, Tom Beauchamp and James Childress define a virtue as a character trait that is “socially valuable and reliably present” and a moral virtue as such a trait that is also both “dispositional” and “morally valuable” (2013, 31, 377). The virtues that they single out as “focal” within biomedical ethics are compassion, discernment, trustworthiness, integrity, and conscientiousness (Beauchamp and Childress, 2013, 37–44). Not all is well in their treatment of virtue. Beauchamp and Childress seem to worry that an ethical theory in which virtues are fundamental will neglect duties, rights, and societal needs. Further, they insist that there is no reason to think that, within ethical theory, one family of ethical concepts is the most important, nor that one theoretical approach is correct, or even superior to others. I will try to show, that there are (and that we have) strong reasons to see language, concepts, and matters of virtue as fundamental within normative ethical theory, both generally and in such specialized subareas as medical ethics. These reasons reveal themselves when we analyze concepts at the core of the alternative approaches to theorizing ethics that Beauchamp and Childress identify.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Schröder, Peter. "Ein vier-Prinzipien-Ansatz für die Bioethik." Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik 51, no. 3 (August 1, 2007): 182–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.14315/zee-2007-0304.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract The four-principles-approach of Tom Beauchamp and Jim Childress has been very influential in bioethics in the last decades. It has proven well although mid-level principles in general and this approach in particular are highly contested by ethicists who would prefer approaches rather based on rules, virtues or personal relations. The author of this study systematically discusses the origin, method and criticism of the Beauchamp and Childress approach. Finally he argues that the applicability of this approach for ethical challenges in the biomedical setting should stimulate a principled approach for ethical challenges of public health as well. Such an approach can utilize the method from Beauchamp and Childress. Principles for public health ethics, as presented in a concise set by the author, however, must be different in scope and content to meet the ethical challenges of public health
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Bladt, Tara, Thomas Vorup-Jensen, Eva Sædder, and Mette Ebbesen. "Empirical Investigation of Ethical Challenges Related to the Use of Biological Therapies." Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 48, no. 3 (2020): 567–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073110520958883.

Full text
Abstract:
The aim of this study was to investigate the ethical dilemma of prioritising financial resources to expensive biological therapies. For this purpose, the four principles of biomedical ethics formulated by ethicists Tom Beauchamp and James Childress were used as a theoretical framework. Based on arguments of justice, Beauchamp and Childress advocate for a health care system organised in line with the Danish system. Notably, our study was carried out in a Danish setting.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Beckwith, Francis, and Allison Krile Thornton. "Moral Status and the Architects of Principlism." Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine 45, no. 4-5 (July 29, 2020): 504–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhaa019.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract In this article, we discuss Beauchamp and Childress’s treatment of the issue of moral status. In particular, we (1) introduce the five different perspectives on moral status that Beauchamp and Childress consider in Principles of Biomedical Ethics and explain their alternative to those perspectives, (2) raise some critical questions about their approach, and (3) offer a different way to think about one of the five theories of moral status (the theory based on human properties) that is more in line with what we believe some of its leading advocates affirm.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Veatch, Robert M. "Reconciling Lists of Principles in Bioethics." Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine 45, no. 4-5 (July 11, 2020): 540–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhaa017.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract In celebration of the fortieth anniversary of the publication of Beauchamp and Childress’s Principles of Biomedical Ethics, a review is undertaken to compare the lists of principles in various bioethical theories to determine the extent to which the various lists can be reconciled. Included are the single principle theories of utilitarianism, libertarianism, Hippocratism, and the theories of Pellegrino, Engelhardt, The Belmont Report, Beauchamp and Childress, Ross, Veatch, and Gert. We find theories all offering lists of principles (or the equivalent) numbering from one to ten. Many of the differences can be reconciled, but some critical differences remain.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

MÜLLER, SABINE, and HENRIK WALTER. "Reviewing Autonomy: Implications of the Neurosciences and the Free Will Debate for the Principle of Respect for the Patient's Autonomy." Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 19, no. 2 (March 12, 2010): 205–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0963180109990478.

Full text
Abstract:
Beauchamp and Childress have performed a great service by strengthening the principle of respect for the patient's autonomy against the paternalism that dominated medicine until at least the 1970s. Nevertheless, we think that the concept of autonomy should be elaborated further. We suggest such an elaboration built on recent developments within the neurosciences and the free will debate. The reason for this suggestion is at least twofold: First, Beauchamp and Childress neglect some important elements of autonomy. Second, neuroscience itself needs a conceptual apparatus to deal with the neural basis of autonomy for diagnostic purposes. This desideratum is actually increasing because modern therapy options can considerably influence the neural basis of autonomy itself.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
More sources

Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Beauchamp and Childress"

1

Martins, Isabel Otilia Parreiral Pinheiro de Matos. "A operacionalização dos princípios da Bioética no principialismo de Beauchamp e Childress." Master's thesis, Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/10362/10612.

Full text
Abstract:
Dissertação apresentada para cumprimento dos requisitos necessários à obtenção do grau de Mestre em Filosofia
Na sexta edição obra Principles of Biomedical Ethics, como nas edições anteriores, Beauchamp e Childress apresentam-nos uma análise detalhada de cada um dos princípios prima facie centrais no debate bioético, assim como os problemas éticos que cada um desses princípios envolve, e propõem um modelo para as situações morais mais difíceis, onde se verifiquem conflitos entre princípios. Tendo em consideração a complexidade da aplicação concreta de cada um dos princípios propostos, procurar-se-á, com o presente trabalho, mostrar não só o processo reflexivo que envolve a “especificação” e a “ponderação” de princípios, mas também mostrar de que modo estes procedimentos se revelam essenciais à vida moral. Neste contexto passar-se-á de questões como, por exemplo, a do respeito pela autonomia, para os problemas do consentimento informado e do paternalismo médico; das diferenças entre os princípios da não-maleficência e da beneficência para os dilemas entre autonomia e beneficência; do princípio da justiça para o problema da justa distribuição de recursos na assistência à saúde.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Waltho, Simon. "A genealogical critique of Beauchamp and Childress' for principles approach to medical ethics." Thesis, Cardiff University, 2010. http://orca.cf.ac.uk/54192/.

Full text
Abstract:
Part Three examines the development of Beauchamp and Childress 'four principles' approach to medical ethics from the 1 st to the 6th Editions of Principles of Biomedical Ethics, arguing that it has, thanks to changes in the authors' conception of philosophical moral theory, been able to productively incorporate the views of many of its critics over this time; that it is also able to incorporate features of different ethical approaches such as virtue ethics, narrative ethics and ethics of care; and that, properly understood, it continues to provide a good framework both for moral reflection in medicine and the provision of concrete action-guides. The thesis concludes by considering this view of the four principles in the light of the earlier sections' approach, and attempting to demonstrate further demonstrate their value through two case-studies.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

García, Cubillos Alejandro. "Autonomía, consentimiento y eutanasia : en el principalismo de Beauchamp & Childress y en derecho penal." Tesis, Universidad de Chile, 2013. http://www.repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/129685.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Karlsson, Josefine. "Experimentet med människor som spelpjäser : En etisk analys av Vipeholmexperimentet utifrån Beauchamp och Childress fyra etiska principer." Thesis, Jönköping University, HLK, Ämnesforskning, 2021. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-53832.

Full text
Abstract:
The aim of this essay is to investigate the ethical issues that permeated the carbohydrate experiment that was going on at Vipeholm's hospital for "uneducable insane" in Sweden. The material about the experiment is taken from Elin Bommenel's dissertation The Sugar Experiment: The Caries Experiments 1943–1960 at Vipeholm Hospital for the Insane. To create understanding, Beauchamp and Childress´s four ethical principles, which are used as ethical guidelines in health care, were used in the analysis of the experiment. The four principles are the principle of nonmaleficence, the principle of respect for autonomy, the principle of beneficence and the principle of justice. The analysis based on the four principles showed that the Vipeholme experiment is complex to understand as Beauchamp and Childress's principles provided a picture of the research which from many aspects cannot be seen as ethically correct. From other aspects, however, some elements can be supported by Beauchamp and Childress. The researchers had the task of investigating caries that would successfully help many people. Based on the principle of beneficence, one could imagine that the researchers acted correctly, but had no respect for the patients' autonomous decisions. The two principles are then in conflict with each other, something that critics of Beauchamp and Childress point out as a shortcoming.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Smith, Nicholas. "Private Rule Following and the Principle of Respect for Autonomy." Ohio University / OhioLINK, 2015. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ohiou1429884767.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Nwaishi, Casmir Chibuike. "The Intimate Connection Between Autonomy and Decision-Making in Applied Health Care Ethics." Thesis, Linköping University, Centre for Applied Ethics, 2004. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-2402.

Full text
Abstract:

The intimate connection between autonomy and decision-making in applied health care, especially in various kinds of consent and refusal has taken center stage in medical ethics since the Salgo decision in 1957. Prior to that time, the physician’s supposedly moral duty to provide appropriate medical care typically surpassed the legal obligation to respect patient’s autonomy. The Salgo decision concluded that physicians have a legal duty to provide facts necessary for the patient to make an informed decision. "The doctor knows best" long ago was replaced with "The doctor proposes; the patient disposes." There is no legal obligation for the patient’s choice to be palatable to anyone, other than that patient himself/herself. Although Beauchamp and Childress justified the obligation to solicit decisions from patients and potential research subjects by the principle of respect for autonomy, they however, acknowledged that the principle’s precise demands remain unsettled and open to interpretations and specification. This thesis addresses a current debate in the bioethical community on the four-principle approach. Using Tom Beauchamp and James Childress as case study, to discuss mainly the principle of respect for autonomy, I go on to explain their central arguments concerning this principle in relation to decision making in health care ethics. Rather than focus on their respective weaknesses, which many theorist and health care professionals do, I emphasis instead on the contribution the principle of respect for autonomy can make in the process of ethical decision making in health care situation.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Onuoha, Chikezie. "Bioethics Across Borders : An African Perspective." Doctoral thesis, Uppsala : Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis : Universitetsbiblioteket [distributör], 2007. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-7844.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Gonçalves, Patrícia Trindade. ""Matar" vs "deixar morrer": critérios de distinção e análise de Beauchamp e Childress em "Principles of Biomedical Ethics"." Master's thesis, 2017. http://hdl.handle.net/10362/25112.

Full text
Abstract:
A dicotomia “matar”/”deixar morrer” tem sido a mais utilizada para separar moralmente a actuação médica nas situações de fim de vida. Se “matar” é tradicionalmente visto como um acto proibido, “deixar morrer” pode, em determinadas circunstâncias, ser um comportamento moralmente admissível. Ao longo do tempo foram propostos vários critérios de diferenciação que permitissem distinguir moralmente as duas situações. Veremos quais foram, os pressupostos em que assentam e as críticas de que foram alvo. Seguidamente, analisaremos a forma como Beauchamp e Childress abordam esta questão na sua obra de referência, Principles of Biomedical Ethics.
The dichotomy between “killing”/"letting die” has been the most common way to morally distinguish medical practices in end of life scenarios. If “killing” has traditionally been seen as an illegal act, than "letting die” may, under certain circumstances, be morally allowed. Over the years, there have been several varying criteria proposed to morally distinguish between such situations. We will look at which ones, the assumptions on which they are based and the reviews they received. Afterwards, we will analyze how Beauchamp and Childress discussed this question in their reference work, the Principles of Biomedical Ethics.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Reitz, Daniela [Verfasser]. "Die ethische Beurteilung der Präimplantationsdiagnostik aus der Perspektive der Prinzipienethik (Tom L. Beauchamp, James F. Childress) und der feministischen Ethik (Susan Sherwin) / von Daniela Reitz." 2007. http://d-nb.info/986369713/34.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Books on the topic "Beauchamp and Childress"

1

F, Childress James, ed. Principles of biomedical ethics / Tom L. Beauchamp, James F. Childress. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Arras, John D., James Childress, and Matthew Adams. Principlism. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190665982.003.0001.

Full text
Abstract:
This chapter provides a survey and critical evaluation of the theory of principlism, as expounded by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress in their increasingly authoritative work The Principles of Biomedical Ethics (editions 1979, 1983, 1989, 1994, 2001, 2009, 2013). It explains the main elements of the theory and how Beauchamp and Childress’s conception of principlism evolved through different editions of their book, as they assimilated their responses to criticisms into an increasingly expansive account. The chapter ends with a discussion of two criticisms of principlism that remain outstanding: the first concerns the interpretation of principles and their application to actual cases, while the second questions the source and justification of principles.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Arras, John D., James Childress, and Matthew Adams. A Common Morality for Hedgehogs. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190665982.003.0002.

Full text
Abstract:
This chapter is an exposition and assessment of Bernard Gert’s arguments for a conception of common morality as the keystone of ethics. It begins by outlining the moral rules, ideals, and decision procedures that Gert defines as constitutive of the content of common morality. It explains how Gert’s appeal to common morality differs from the role that it plays in the work of Beauchamp and Childress. The chapter then canvasses two objections to Gert’s position. The first raises doubts about whether his description of the content of common morality is accurate, particularly given that it is not supported by any rigorous empirical evidence, and the second challenges his claim that common morality does not change over time.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Arras, John D., James Childress, and Matthew Adams. One Method to Rule Them All? Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190665982.003.0008.

Full text
Abstract:
This chapter considers the method of reflective equilibrium, and how it has been used in the context of debates in bioethics. It uncovers the method’s origins in the work of John Rawls and explores how it came to be adopted by Beauchamp and Childress as the unifying method of bioethics. After distinguishing between narrow and wide versions of reflective equilibrium, the chapter proceeds to discuss some problems with the view. The preliminary difficulty that is raised about wide reflective equilibrium in particular is that it is too comprehensive and indeterminate to be useful in bioethics. The chapter ends by outlining deeper concerns with the view, and to what extent internal morality’s conception of “coherence” possesses justificatory force.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Carlin, Nathan. Pastoral Aesthetics. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190270148.001.0001.

Full text
Abstract:
It is often said that bioethics as a field began in theology during the 1960s but that it became secular during subsequent decades, yielding to other disciplines and professions such as philosophy and law, because it was felt that a neutral language was needed to provide a common ground for guiding clinical practice and research protocols. This common ground was provided by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress in their The Principles of Biomedical Ethics—an approach that became known as principlist bioethics. Pastoral Aesthetics recovers a role for religion in bioethics by providing a new perspective rooted in pastoral theology. Nathan Carlin argues that pastoral theologians can enrich moral imagination in bioethics by cultivating an aesthetic sensibility that is theologically-informed, psychologically-sophisticated, therapeutically-oriented, and experientially-grounded. To achieve these ends, Carlin employs Paul Tillich’s method of correlation by positioning four principles of bioethics with four images of pastoral care. In so doing, he draws on a range of sources, including painting, fiction, memoir, poetry, journalism, cultural studies, clinical journals, classic cases in bioethics, and original pastoral care conversations. The result is a form of interdisciplinary inquiry that will be of special interest to bioethicists, theologians, and chaplains.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Arras, John. Methods in Bioethics. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190665982.001.0001.

Full text
Abstract:
This book provides an overview and critical discussion of the main philosophical methods that have dominated the field of bioethics. The first three chapters outline some influential theories that are important to understanding the methodological approaches that follow. Chapter 1 offers a survey of the theory of principlism as expounded by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress, chapter 2 examines Bernard Gert’s defense of common morality, and chapter 3 discusses the so-termed new casuistry. The next three chapters trace a historical dialectic. Chapter 4 explores the shift that has increasingly occurred in bioethics away from the pursuit of objectivity or truth and toward narrative ethics, while chapter 5 uncovers the “classical” roots of American pragmatism and explains their ongoing relevance for contemporary bioethics. This paves the way for chapter 6’s examination of “freestanding” pragmatists such as Susan Wolf who, in contrast, see their approach as untethered to the classical canon of American pragmatism. With this background firmly established, the next two chapters handle some influential contemporary approaches. Chapter 7 considers the “internal morality” approach to medicine; chapter 8 discusses the method of reflective equilibrium, and chapter 9 summarizes and reflects on the results of the preceding eight chapters. Rather than staking out and defending a final position, the book aspires to uncover the costs and benefits of the respective methodological approaches that are surveyed. In the words of Kierkegaard, it aims to make life “harder” rather than “easier” for bioethics by uncovering some outstanding challenges.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Rhodes, Rosamond. The Trusted Doctor. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/med/9780190859909.001.0001.

Full text
Abstract:
Common morality has been the touchstone for addressing issues of medical ethics since the publication of Beauchamp and Childress’s Principles of Biomedical Ethics in 1979. This book challenges that reigning view by presenting an original account of the ethics of medicine. It begins by demonstrating why the standard common morality accounts of medical ethics are unsuitable for the profession and inadequate for responding to the uncommon issues that arise in medical practice. It then explains medicine’s distinctive ethics in terms of the trust that society allows to the profession. Starting with the obligation to “seek trust and be trustworthy,” the book goes on to explicate sixteen specific duties that doctors take on when they join the profession. By enumerating the duties of medical professionals and explaining their importance with numerous clinical examples, this book presents a cohesive and coherent description of the duties of medical professionals that is largely consistent with codes of medical ethics posted on websites of medical societies around the world. It also explains why it is critical for physicians to develop the attitudes or doctorly virtues that comprise the character of trustworthy doctors and buttress physicians’ efforts to fulfill their professional obligations. Together, the presentation of physicians’ duties and the elements that comprise a doctorly character add up to a description of what medical professionalism entails. This analysis provides a clear understanding of medical professionalism and guides doctors in navigating the ethically challenging situations that arise in clinical practice.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Book chapters on the topic "Beauchamp and Childress"

1

SCHÖNE-SEIFERT, BETTINA. "DANGER AND MERITS OF PRINCIPLISM Meta-theoretical Reflections on the Beauchamp/Childress- Approach to Biomedical Ethics." In Bioethics in Cultural Contexts, 109–19. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4241-8_8.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Wallimann-Helmer, Ivo, and Muriel Keller. "3 Prinzipienethik nach Beauchamp und Childress." In Ethik für medizinische Berufe, 31–42. Versus Verlag AG, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.24096/9783039097760-31.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

"6.2 Mittlere Prinzipien der Ethik nach Beauchamp und Childress." In Praxiswissen Palliativmedizin, edited by Christoph Gerhard. Stuttgart: Georg Thieme Verlag, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/b-0034-101649.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Pugh, Jonathan. "Introduction." In Autonomy, Rationality, and Contemporary Bioethics, 1–19. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198858584.003.0001.

Full text
Abstract:
The introduction outlines the motivation for investigating the relationship between autonomy and rationality in contemporary bioethics, and maps the contours of a pre-theoretical understanding of autonomy, in preparation for the theoretical analysis to come. Having noted some apparent ambiguities and tensions within the widely accepted assumption that there is a close relationship between autonomy and rationality, the author briefly distinguishes procedural and substantive accounts of autonomy, and identifies Beauchamp and Childress’ pioneering work in the principles of biomedical ethics as providing the standard account of autonomy in bioethics. He outlines some objections to the standard account, and goes on to outline a framework that is used in the rest of the book for developing a rationalist account of autonomy that aims to avoid these objections.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Rhodes, Rosamond. "Why a New Approach to Medical Ethics Is Needed." In The Trusted Doctor, 9–43. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/med/9780190859909.003.0002.

Full text
Abstract:
The Trusted Doctor: Medical Ethics and Professionalism rejects the well-entrenched views of medical ethics as everyday ethics or common morality applied to medicine. This chapter lays the foundation for the original account of medical ethics that follows in the book’s succeeding chapters. By presenting vivid examples and general arguments the author demonstrates ways in which the ethics of medicine is distinct and different from common morality. The chapter discusses the most popular common morality views, namely, the four principles approach expounded by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress in Principles of Biomedical Ethics and the ten rules approach presented by Bernard Gert, Charles Culver, and K. Danner Clouser in Bioethics: A Systematic Approach by presenting arguments that challenge their applicability to medical practice. A chart identifies some stark differences between the common morality approach and good medical practice and shows how everyday ethics is incompatible with medical professionalism.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Shanker, Ruby Rajendra, Angela Underhill, Valerie Nicholson, Logan Kennedy, Denise Jaworsky, and Mona Loutfy. "Ethical Issues in the Care and Support of Women Living with HIV." In Ethical Issues in Women's Healthcare, edited by Lori d’Agincourt-Canning and Carolyn Ells, 107–28. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/med/9780190851361.003.0006.

Full text
Abstract:
This chapter aims to explore some of the ethical issues that arise when providing clinical care and support to women living with HIV across the life course. Feminist perspectives and intersectionality inform the authors’ interpretation of the four principles of biomedical ethics as described by Beauchamp and Childress: autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. The analysis also addresses the issues of stigma and oppression. Developed in accordance with the principles of the Greater Involvement of People Living with HIV/AIDS (GIPA) and Meaningful Involvement of People Living with HIV (MIPA), this chapter honors the experiences of a woman living with HIV who, as a peer research associate, knowledge keeper, and front-line warrior, and through her Indigenous identity, lends crucial insight to the discourse. Her experiences enrich the perspectives of a healthcare ethicist, a nurse, a doctoral student, and two physicians who together have three decades of experience working with women living with HIV.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Londyn Menkes, Daniel. "Climate Change: A Forced Choice Ethical Paradigm." In Bioethics in Medicine and Society. IntechOpen, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95486.

Full text
Abstract:
Notwithstanding the political debates in the media, climate change presents a unique set of ethical challenges faced by all the planet’s inhabitants. To understand the current challenges facing humanity, it is important to retrace the evolution of human society as this underlies the ethical foundations that internalize a group’s beliefs and norms. Humans have modified the environment on a global scale that is unsustainable that has resulted in climate change-a disease process with dire implications. Understanding the root causes of a disease process is the best means of devising a treatment plan. Climate change solutions must be syntonic with a biopsychosocial model that addresses culture and belief systems. The six main ethical theories-utilitarianism, egoism, deontology, virtue, divine command, and relativism all have their inherent flaws. Beauchamp and Childress concatenated these constructs into the four main bioethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-malfeasance, and justice. Of these, autonomy is least applicable to climate change as decisions made by a subgroup of one species will have an impact on all terrestrial lifeforms both present and future. Humanity must accept the reality of climate change and effect solutions based on these four principles. Failure to act will lead to catastrophic climate changes that may lead to the sixth mass extinction. Effective climate change solutions must embrace an integrative approach by supporting leaders who will embrace science and will advocate for universal human rights.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Kovac, Jeffrey. "Ethics, Morals, and Ethical Theory." In The Ethical Chemist. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190668648.003.0006.

Full text
Abstract:
In ordinary language, the words ethics and morals are used interchangeably to refer to standards of conduct or social norms that guide proper behavior. The English ethics derives from the Greek ethika, meaning character or custom, and is related to the Latin mores, also meaning custom, which gave us the word moral. Some philosophers, however, distinguish between the two. Morals is often taken to refer to universal norms of human behavior—the distinction between good and evil—whereas ethics is used as a generic term for all the different ways scholars use to understand and examine our moral lives (Beauchamp and Childress 2001). Some approaches to ethics are normative while others are nonnormative. Normative approaches seek to discover and justify the general standards of be­havior we should accept, and to apply them to specific situations. Nonnormative approaches can be descriptive—that is, factual investigations of moral con­duct and belief—or what is called meta-ethics, the analysis of ethical language, concepts, and methods of reasoning. Morality generally refers to norms for right and wrong human conduct that are so widely shared they form a stable social consensus. Here it is important to distinguish between what many philosophers call the common morality, the norms that all serious persons share, and communal norms that are shared only by a specific community. Common morality, although it cannot be specified precisely, is universal. Communal norms are similar to the common morality but are specific to a particular group, like a religious or cultural community. Common morality also includes moral ideals and extraordinary virtues, which call us to exhibit morally exemplary behavior. Common morality seems to spring from human nature as shaped by living together in community. Successful communal life requires that people adhere to certain standards of behavior. For example, a principle of promise keeping seems essential to any society, whatever its specific organization. Similarly, the arbitrary harming or killing of other people cannot be tolerated in a civilized society. A principle of truth telling seems essential to all human relationships.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Litchfield, Paul. "Ethics in occupational health." In Fitness for Work, 88–101. Oxford University Press, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/med/9780199643240.003.0005.

Full text
Abstract:
Ethics, or moral philosophy, is an attempt to define principles that govern how people should behave in society. Healthcare is practised within communities and must reflect the cultural and ethical values of society as a whole. Professional codes of ethics are not unique to healthcare, but from as early as the 5th century BC ethical behaviour has been acknowledged as a cornerstone of good medical practice. The relationship between a health professional and a patient is one where power lies predominantly with the health professional and the various biomedical ethical codes seek, among other things, to redress that balance. Underpinning all of biomedical ethics are four main principles or shared moral beliefs first articulated by Beauchamp and Childress in the 1970s:1 Respect for autonomy of the individual. Non-malfeasance (do no harm). Beneficence (do good). Justice (fairness and equality).In some situations the principles can be opposing and each health professional must decide on the right course of action in those circumstances and be accountable for their decision. Material is available to help deal with such dilemmas and in the UK both the General Medical Council (GMC)2 and the British Medical Association (BMA)3 produce comprehensive guidance. Cultural and societal differences can lead to varied views on what is ethically acceptable and global guidance issued by bodies such as the World Medical Association4 is particularly useful as people become more mobile internationally. The issues in occupational health (OH) may differ from those in other branches of healthcare but the same four principles apply. A therapeutic relationship is uncommon in OH and blanket use of the term ‘patient’ in describing ethical duties may therefore be unhelpful since it may lead healthcare professionals and/or those to whom they are rendering services to believe that ethical guidance does not apply to much of their work. Internationally the term ‘worker’ is used much more widely in ethical guidance and this is the terminology that will be used throughout this chapter, whether or not a therapeutic relationship exists. In practice, the ethical challenges and reasoning that should be applied are essentially the same, whether the relationship is a therapeutic one or not, since the power predominantly lies with the OH professional. A worker is far more likely to divulge confidential information to a member of the OH team than to a lay person and management is far more likely to accept guidance on health matters from an OH professional than from someone without a healthcare qualification. OH practitioners enjoy the authority and the status of their core professions—they must therefore apply the same ethical principles as their peers in other specialties. Ethical guidance in OH has tended to be produced at national level, by and for individual professional groups within the discipline.5,6 This has its benefits but does not reflect well the multidisciplinary nature of most OH teams or the increasing globalization of the workforce. The International Commission on Occupational Health (ICOH) has produced a code of ethics7 that applies to all OH professionals and which is particularly helpful for those with international responsibilities. There is sometimes confusion between acting ethically and acting lawfully. They are not the same. Laws sometimes allow health professionals to opt out on ethical or moral grounds (e.g. termination of pregnancy). Where that is not the case practitioners should reflect carefully, consult with appropriate colleagues and follow their conscience in full knowledge of any potential consequences for themselves of breaking the law. Simple legal compliance does not guarantee ethical behaviour and acting ethically may be unlawful. The hallmark of a professional is taking responsibility for one’s own actions and acting with probity—that may be difficult but the application of sound ethical analysis can ease the process.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Carlin, Nathan. "Introduction: Bioethics and Theology." In Pastoral Aesthetics, 1–12. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190270148.003.0001.

Full text
Abstract:
This chapter reviews the role of religion in bioethics and proposes a new way forward, which, in terms of methodology, will be outlined in chapter 1. What this books adds—how it is different from most accounts of theological bioethics—is that this is a work of what the author calls pastoral aesthetics. Specifically, the distinguishing feature of this book is its employment of pastoral theology (via a distinct interdisciplinary method of correlation) in bioethics. The chapter begins with a review of how bioethics has been defined and then makes an argument for the reintroduction of religion to the field. The author uses Gilbert Meilaender’s Bioethics: A Primer for Christians as an example of religion’s role in bioethics and juxtaposes Meilaender’s view with those of feminist theological ethicists Beverly Harrison and Shirley Cloyes. Finally, the author outlines the structure of the book, which aligns with the four principles in Tom Beauchamp and James Childress’s Principles of Biomedical Ethics.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
You might also be interested in the extended bibliographies on the topic 'Beauchamp and Childress' for particular source types:
Journal articles
We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!

To the bibliography