rss
J Med Ethics 2008;34:458-462 doi:10.1136/jme.2007.022038
  • Ethics

Caring for risky patients: duty or virtue?

  1. T Tomlinson
  1. Tom Tomlinson, Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences, Michigan State University, C208 E Fee, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA; tomlins4{at}msu.edu
  • Received 26 June 2007
  • Revised 13 September 2007
  • Accepted 19 September 2007

Abstract

The emergence several years ago of SARS, with its high rate of infection and death among healthcare workers, resurrected a recurring ethical question: do health professionals have a duty to provide care to patients with deadly infectious diseases, even at some substantial risk to themselves and their families? The conventional answer, repeated on the heels of the SARS epidemic, is that they do. In this paper, I argue that the arguments in support of such a duty are wanting in significant respects, and that the language of duty is simply not adequate to an understanding of all the moral dimensions of professional responses to the care of risky patients. Instead, we should speak the language of virtues and ideals if we want to do justice to the complexity of such harrowing circumstances.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None declared.

This Article

  1. Abstract
  2. Full text
  3. PDF

Responses

  1. Submit a response
  2. No responses published

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.