Skip to main content
Log in

Casuistry and clinical ethics

  • Published:
Theoretical Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For the last century, moral philosophy has stressed theory for the analysis of moral argument and concepts. In the last decade, interest in the ethical issues of health care has stimulated attention to cases and particular instances. This has revealed the gap between ethical theory and practice. This article reviews the history and method of casuistry which for many centuries provided an approach to practical ethics. Its strengths and weaknesses are noted and its potential for contemporary use explored.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aristotle: 1941, The Rhetoric, R. McKeon (trans.), Random House, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cicero: 1949, De Inventione, H. M. Hubbell (trans.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, I, 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hare, R. M.: 1981, Moral Thinking: Its Levels, Method and Point, Clarendon Press, Oxford, p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jonsen, A. R.: 1980, ‘Can an ethicist be a consultant?’, in V. Abernathy (ed.), Frontiers in Medical Ethics, Ballinger, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Jonsen, A. R., Siegler, M., Winslade, W.: 1982, Clinical Ethics, Macmillan Publishing Co., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kirk, K.: 1927, Conscience and Its Problems, Longman's Green, London.

    Google Scholar 

  7. National Commission for Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research: 1977, Research Involving Children, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  8. National Commission for Protection of Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research: 1978, The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pascal, B.: 1956, The Provincial Letters, A. J. Krailsheimer (trans.), Penguin Books, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ramsey, P.: 1970, The Patient As Person, Yale University press, New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Russell, B.: 1979, ‘On the presumption against taking life’; Tramell, R.: ‘On the non-equivalency of saving life and not taking life’; Menzel, P.: ‘Are killing and letting die morally different in medical contexts’, all in Journal of Philosophy and Medicine 4.

  12. Self, D. J.: 1979, ‘Philosophical foundation of various approaches to medical ethical decision making’, Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 4, 20–31.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Siegler, M.: 1978, ‘Teaching clinical ethics at the bedside’, New England Journal of Medicine 239, 951–955.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sidgwick, H.: 1874, The Methods of Ethics, Macmillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Thomasma, D. C.: 1979, ‘Medical ethics teaching’, Journal of Medical Education 54, 898–904.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Warnock, G. J.: 1967, Contemporary Moral Philosophy, St. Martin's Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Whewell, W.: 1852, Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy in England, John Parker, London.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jonsen, A.R. Casuistry and clinical ethics. Theor Med Bioeth 7, 65–74 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00489424

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00489424

Key words

Navigation