Article Text
Abstract
A survey of the recent literature suggests that physicians should engage religious patients on religious grounds when the patient cites religious considerations for a medical decision. We offer two arguments that physicians ought to avoid engaging patients in this manner. The first is the Public Reason Argument. We explain why physicians are relevantly akin to public officials. This suggests that it is not the physician’s proper role to engage in religious deliberation. This is because the public character of a physician’s role binds him/her to public reason, which precludes the use of religious considerations. The second argument is the Fiduciary Argument. We show that the patient-physician relationship is a fiduciary relationship, which suggests that the patient has the clinical expectation that physicians limit themselves to medical considerations. Since engaging in religious deliberations lies outside this set of considerations, such engagement undermines trust and therefore damages the patient-physician relationship.
- clinical ethics
- moral and religious aspects
- applied and professional ethics
- decision-making
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors RKH and JG contributed substantially and equally to the content, arguments and organisation of the paper.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Linked Articles
- Concise argument
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
Other content recommended for you
- Physicians’ duty to refrain from religious discourse: a response to critics
- Public reason and the limited right to conscientious objection: a response to Magelssen
- Doing theology in medical decision-making
- Public reason’s private roles: legitimising disengagement from religious patients and managing physician trauma
- Whither religion in medicine?
- Responding (appropriately) to religious patients: a response to Greenblum and Hubbard’s ‘Public Reason’ argument
- The importance of prudence within inclusive bioethics
- Assessing the ethical weight of cultural, religious and spiritual claims in the clinical context
- Settling for second best: when should doctors agree to parental demands for suboptimal medical treatment?
- The role of religious beliefs in ethics committee consultations for conflict over life-sustaining treatment