Two Troubling Trends in the Conversation Over Whether Clinical Ethics Consultants Have Ethics Expertise
- PMID: 28421331
- DOI: 10.1007/s10730-017-9321-8
Two Troubling Trends in the Conversation Over Whether Clinical Ethics Consultants Have Ethics Expertise
Abstract
In a recent issue of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, several scholars wrote on the topic of ethics expertise in clinical ethics consultation. The articles in this issue exemplified what we consider to be two troubling trends in the quest to articulate a unique expertise for clinical ethicists. The first trend, exemplified in the work of Lisa Rasmussen, is an attempt to define a role for clinical ethicists that denies they have ethics expertise. Rasmussen cites the dependence of ethical expertise on irresolvable meta-ethical debates as the reason for this move. We argue against this deflationary strategy because it ends up smuggling in meta-ethical assumptions it claims to avoid. Specifically, we critique Rasmussen's distinction between the ethical and normative features of clinical ethics cases. The second trend, exemplified in the work of Dien Ho, also attempts to avoid meta-ethics. However, unlike Rasmussen, Ho tries to articulate a notion of ethics expertise that does not rely upon meta-ethics. Specifically, we critique Ho's attempts to explain how clinical ethicists can resolve moral disputes using what he calls the "Default Principle" and "arguments by parity." We show that these strategies do not work unless those with the moral disagreement already share certain meta-ethical assumptions. Ultimately, we argue that the two trends of (1) attempting to avoid meta-ethics by denying that clinical ethicists have ethics expertise, and (2) attempting to articulate how ethics expertise can be used to resolve disputes without meta-ethics both fail because they do not, in fact, avoid doing meta-ethics. We conclude that these trends detract from what clinical ethics consultation was founded to do and ought to still be doing-provide moral guidance, which requires ethics expertise, and engagement with meta-ethics. To speak of ethicists without ethics expertise leaves their role in the clinic dangerously unclear and unjustified.
Keywords: Clinical ethics; Clinical ethics consultation; Ethics expertise; Health care ethics; Meta-ethics; Moral expertise.
Similar articles
-
Keeping it Ethically Real.J Med Philos. 2016 Aug;41(4):369-83. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhw010. Epub 2016 Jun 2. J Med Philos. 2016. PMID: 27256847 Free PMC article.
-
Moral Philosophy, Moral Expertise, and the Argument from Disagreement.Bioethics. 2016 Mar;30(3):188-94. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12173. Epub 2015 Jun 24. Bioethics. 2016. PMID: 26104240
-
The nature and value of bioethics expertise.Bioethics. 2015 Jun;29(5):324-33. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12114. Epub 2014 Sep 24. Bioethics. 2015. PMID: 25256867
-
The authority of the clinical ethicist.Hastings Cent Rep. 1998 Nov-Dec;28(6):6-11. Hastings Cent Rep. 1998. PMID: 9868603 Review.
-
The nature of ethical expertise.Hastings Cent Rep. 1998 Nov-Dec;28(6):11-9. Hastings Cent Rep. 1998. PMID: 9868604 Review.
Cited by
-
A Guide to Establishing Ethics Committees in Behavioral Health Settings.Behav Anal Pract. 2020 Aug 17;13(4):939-949. doi: 10.1007/s40617-020-00455-6. eCollection 2020 Dec. Behav Anal Pract. 2020. PMID: 33269203 Free PMC article.
-
Against Inflationary Views of Ethics Expertise.HEC Forum. 2018 Jun;30(2):171-185. doi: 10.1007/s10730-018-9353-8. HEC Forum. 2018. PMID: 29796986
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Other Literature Sources