Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Why not common morality?
  1. Rosamond Rhodes
  1. Medical Education, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Rosamond Rhodes,Medical Education, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA; Rosamond.Rhodes{at}mssm.edu

Abstract

This paper challenges the leading common morality accounts of medical ethics which hold that medical ethics is nothing but the ethics of everyday life applied to today’s high-tech medicine. Using illustrative examples, the paper shows that neither the Beauchamp and Childress four-principle account of medical ethics nor the Gert et al 10-rule version is an adequate and appropriate guide for physicians’ actions. By demonstrating that medical ethics is distinctly different from the ethics of everyday life and cannot be derived from it, the paper argues that medical professionals need a touchstone other than common morality for guiding their professional decisions. That conclusion implies that a new theory of medical ethics is needed to replace common morality as the standard for understanding how medical professionals should behave and what medical professionalism entails. En route to making this argument, the paper addresses fundamental issues that require clarification: what is a profession? how is a profession different from a role? how is medical ethics related to medical professionalism? The paper concludes with a preliminary sketch for a theory of medical ethics.

  • common morality
  • medical ethics
  • principlism
  • professionalism
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Correction notice This article has been corrected since it was first published online. Footnotes viii and xiii were added.

  • Contributors I am the sole author of this paper.

  • Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles