Article Text
Abstract
Moral conflicts occur in theories that involve more than one principle. I examine basic ways of dealing with moral dilemmas in medical ethics and in ethics generally, and propose a different approach based on a principle I call the “mutuality principle”. It is offered as an addition to Tom Beauchamp and James Childress’ principlism. The principle calls for the mutual enhancement of basic moral values. After explaining the principle and its strengths, I test it by way of an examination of three responses—in the recent Festschrift for Dr Raanon Gillon—to a case involving parental refusal of a blood transfusion. The strongest response is the one that comes closest to the requirements of the mutuality principle but yet falls short. I argue that the mutuality principle provides an explicit future orientation in principlism and gives it greater moral coherence.
- principlism
- moral conflict
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”
- Defending the four principles approach as a good basis for good medical practice and therefore for good medical ethics
- The bioethical principles and Confucius’ moral philosophy
- What principlism misses
- When four principles are too many: a commentary
- Is procreative beneficence obligatory?
- Judgement and the role of the metaphysics of values in medical ethics
- Ethics in epidemiology and public health I. Technical terms
- The best interest standard and children: clarifying a concept and responding to its critics
- The virtues (and vices) of the four principles