Reconceptualizing nursing ethics.

M C Cooper

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 2274732

Reconceptualizing nursing ethics.

M C Cooper

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This paper offers a comparative analysis of four central concepts of moral theory--autonomy, moral posture, universal vs. particular, and the role of rules and principles. These concepts are compared as they function in traditional rule-and-principle ethics and the more recently explicated ethic of care. Implications of the distinctiveness of these two extant frameworks for the development of nursing ethics are set out. In conclusion, the claim is made that an inclusive approach to these different moral visions which places them in a mutually informative relationship holds the potential to enrich and enliven the developing nursing ethic.

Explore related subjects

Choice Behavior Contracts Ethical Theory Ethics, Nursing Female Gender Identity Humans Male Models, Theoretical Moral Obligations Morals Personal Autonomy Power, Psychological Analytical Approach Bioethics and Professional Ethics Philosophical Approach Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

M C Cooper. 1990. Reconceptualizing nursing ethics.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2274732/

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2002

The Eriksen flanker effect revisited.

Four studies are reported on the potential role of perceptual interference in a standard Eriksen flanker task. In the first study, incongruent flanker letters showed the usual effect on choice reaction time (CRT) to the target letter but had no effect on the visual fixation time (VFT) needed to distinguish target and flankers. In the second experiment, the effect of incongruent flankers was studied in the context of a same-different response in regard to the target letter and a subsequently presented single letter. The effect of incongruent flankers vanished at an interstimulus interval of 200 ms. In Experiment 3, the same-different task was used in the paradigm of the functional visual field with a target-flankers combination as stimulus on the left (SL) and a single letter as stimulus on the right side (SR) of the visual field. Flankers did neither affect VFT nor the same-different CRT suggesting that target selection may proceed during the saccade from SL to SR. In Experiment 4 effects were studied of flanker-to-target and target-to-single-letter similarity. Flanker-to-target similarity did neither affect VFT nor same-different CRT but target-to-single-letter similarity prolonged same-different CRT. Together, the results suggest parallel perceptual processing of target and flankers, followed by competition of responses to the target and to the incongruent flankers. In line with earlier research, processes of response selection and response competition appear not to be tied to VFT but to proceed in parallel with the saccade from SL to SR.

Choice Behavior↗

PubMed2002

Measuring consumer perceptions of quality differences among competing health benefit plans.

In this paper, we combine revealed preference and survey data on attribute importance to estimate parameters that represent average perceived differences in the quality and convenience of competing health benefit plans. We find that consumers do not perceive differences in provider quality across options. though they do perceive differences related to waiting time and access to specialists. In order to validate our approach, we estimate parameters representing perceived premiums and compare the estimates to actual premium differences. The results suggest that consumers correctly perceive the high-premium option to cost more than the low-premium option. These results increase our confidence in the use of stated importance data to identify and interpret parameters measuring the effect of otherwise unobservable attributes of choice alternatives.

Choice Behavior↗

PubMed2002

The next big thing in health benefits: consumer choice.

Consumers are the only ones who can affect all decision points that drive health care cost and quality. As a result, consumers' health and financial security depend on their taking more responsibility for their health care decisions and having the tools and information needed to do so successfully. This article explains the five key decision points that drive health care cost and quality, how technology aids marketplace innovations, and how employers can help advance consumer choice in order to push the health care system to deliver better care and keep inflation in check.

Choice Behavior↗