Article Text
Abstract
The eclectic problem solving methodology used by the British Medical Association (BMA) is described in this paper. It has grown from the daily need to respond to doctors’ practical queries and incorporates reference to law, traditional professional codes, and established BMA policies—all of which must be regularly assessed against the benchmark of contemporary societal expectations. The two Jehovah’s Witness scenarios are analysed, using this methodology and in both cases the four principles solution is found to concur with that of the BMA’s approach. The author’s overall conclusion is that although the BMA resorts to a lengthier list of thins to consider, the solutions that emerge are often likely to coincide with the four principles approach.
- four principles approach to medical ethics
- law and medical ethics
- Jehovah’s Witnesses
- British Medical Association
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Ethics needs principles—four can encompass the rest—and respect for autonomy should be “first among equals”
- Good clinical practice and informed consent are inseparable
- The development of professional guidelines on the law and ethics of male circumcision
- The BMA's guidance on conscientious objection may be contrary to human rights law
- Refusal of potentially life-saving blood transfusions by Jehovah's Witnesses: should doctors explain that not all JWs think it's religiously required?
- Female genital mutilation: the law as it relates to children
- Defending the four principles approach as a good basis for good medical practice and therefore for good medical ethics
- Ethics briefings
- Who gets the ventilator? Important legal rights in a pandemic
- The law and ethics of male circumcision: guidance for doctors