Ethics
Ethics
• Beauchamp and Childress were writing at a time when the expertise of doctors
meant they often took extreme measures in doing what they had decided was in the
best interests of their patient. They adopted a paternalistic approach, treating their
patients like uninformed children rather than autonomous, capable adults. This went
as far as performing involuntary sterilisations. In one widely discussed court case in
bioethics, Madrigal v Quillian, ten Latina women in the US successfully sued after
doctors performed hysterectomies on them without their informed consent.
• Legally speaking, the women in Madrigal v Quillian had provided consent. However,
Beauchamp and Childress explain clearly why the kind of consent they provided isn’t
adequate. The women – who spoke Spanish as a first language – were all being given
emergency caesareans. They were asked to sign consent forms written in English
which empowered doctors to do what they deemed medically necessary.
Nonmaleficence: ‘first do no
harm’
• Medicine routinely involves doing things most people would consider
harmful. Surgeons cut people open, doctors write prescriptions for
medicines with a range of side effects, researchers give sick people
experimental drugs – the list goes on
• This is clearly too broad a definition of harm to be useful. Instead,
Beauchamp and Childress provide some helpful nuance, suggesting in
practice, ‘first do no harm’ means avoiding anything which
is unnecessarily or unjustifiably harmful. All medicine has some risk.
The relevant question is whether the level of harm is proportionate to
the good it might achieve and whether there are other procedures
that might achieve the same result without causing as much harm.
Beneficence: do as much good
as you can
• Some people have suggested Beauchamp and Childress’s four
principles are three principles. They suggest beneficence and non-
maleficence are two sides of the same coin.
• Beneficence refers to acts of kindness, charity and altruism. A
beneficent person does more than the bare minimum. In a medical
context, this means not only ensuring you don’t treat a patient badly
but ensuring you treat them well.
• The principle of beneficence can often clash with the principle of
autonomy. If a patient hasn’t consented to a procedure which could
be in their best interests, what should a doctor do?
Justice: distribute health
resources fairly
• Healthcare often operates with limited resources. As much as we
would like to treat everyone, sometimes there aren’t enough beds,
doctors, nurses or medications to go around. Justice is the principle
that helps us determine who gets priority in these cases.
Conclusion
• • When attempting to resolve an ethical challenge in practice, you
should determine if it is an issue or a dilemma.
• • Distinguish between personal and professional dimensions; and
identify the ethical, moral, legal, and values considerations in the
situation.
• • After conducting this preliminary analysis, an ethical decision-
making model can then be appropriately applied