Responses

Download PDFPDF
Paper
When four principles are too many: bloodgate, integrity and an action-guiding model of ethical decision making in clinical practice
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    When guideline aren't enough

    Dear Editor,

    Muirhead argues that Beauchamp and Childress' principalist approach to ethics is of little practical relevance to the majority of commonly occurring clinical ethical scenarios. Through analysis of three cases which involve conflict between the principles of autonomy and benefice, he demonstrates that many scenarios are well rehearsed with the "correct" answers enshrined in guideline and statute. His pap...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.