PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15228397

Ethics as process and practice.

A W Frank
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The noun form of ethics suggests something substantive; this substance is located in both offices of institutionalized experts and a body of canonical solutions to recognizable troubles. The present article recommends thinking of ethics not as substance but as a process of lives and decisions affecting each other over time. No single decision stands alone and no single patient can be considered as a stand-alone entity. Examples include how people struggle with choices they should not have to make, how decisions at one time are affected by earlier decisions that are not considered within the purview of ethics, and how to deal with conflicts of legitimate interests. When institutional ethics becomes a prescribed activity, the goal of being ethical is easily forgotten.

Explore related subjects

Decision MakingEthics, MedicalPhilosophy, MedicalBioethics and Professional EthicsJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A W Frank. 2004. Ethics as process and practice.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-5994.2004.00622.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2005

The use of patient reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice: lack of impact or lack of theory?

This paper applies a theory-driven approach to explore why the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in clinical practice, in particular, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments, has little or no apparent influence on clinical decision making. A theory-driven approach involves combining knowledge of whether and how an intervention works. It is argued that such an approach is currently lacking within the literature evaluating the effectiveness of feeding back HRQoL information to clinicians. The paper identifies a number of mechanisms that might give rise to the expected outcomes that are currently implicit within the design of the intervention and hypotheses specified within the trials evaluating the use of HRQoL measures in clinical practice. It then examines how far current clinical practice matches these mechanisms and in doing so, a number of possible explanations for the lack of impact of HRQoL on clinical decision making are reviewed. The influence of HRQoL information on clinical decision making depends on a large number of factors related to the design of the intervention, patients' and clinicians' desire to discuss HRQoL issues within the consultation and the legitimacy that clinicians give to HRQoL instruments. To date, knowledge of how the feedback of HRQoL information to clinicians might improve doctor-patient communication or clinical decision making has yet to sufficiently inform an assessment of whether these aspects of patient care are improved. The paper concludes by specifying how the feedback of HRQoL information to clinicians might be modified to maximise its impact on clinical decision making.

Decision Making↗