No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Law and Ethics: Opportunistic Infections of Medical Practice?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 July 2014
Extract
The medical profession is in a crisis due to the increasing awareness of pluralism and the rejection of “community standards of practice” as a principle ethically and legally sufficient to govern medical practice. Historically, professional peer-review and appeals to local medical community standards of practice have been the basis for managing legal and ethical disputes. It was rare for patients or courts to challenge the authority and autonomy of the profession. This was the legacy of an earlier, less pluralistic society. Monolithic societies have a common or authoritative set of moral values, usually founded on a religious structure and institution, so that the moral limits of any type of practice, including medical practice, are well understood. We no longer live in such a society.
- Type
- Comments/Commentaires
- Information
- Canadian Journal of Law and Society / La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société , Volume 3 , 1988 , pp. 265 - 272
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Law and Society Association 1988
References
Notes
1. See Helling v. Carey 519 P.2d 981 (Wash. 1974).
2. See Judge Spotswood W. Brown III, “Majority Opinion” in Canterbury v. Spence. U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, May 19, 1972. 464 Federal Reporter, 2nd series 772.
3. Rosenberg, L. and Calabresi, G., “Law and Medicine in Confrontation: A Dean's Dialogue,” Yale Law School Program in Civil Liability, Working Paper #45 (1986)Google Scholar.
4. Fleishman, Alan B., “A Physician's View,” Hastings Center Report 11 (1981), no. 2, 18–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Avorn, Jerry, “A Physician's Perspective,” Hastings Center Report 12 (1982), no. 3, 11–12Google ScholarPubMed.
5. Seigler, Mark, “Cautionary Advice for Humanists,” Hastings Center Report 11 (1981), no. 2, 19–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
6. Katz, Jay, The Silent World of Doctor and Patient (New York: Free Press, 1984)Google Scholar.
7. Taylor, Kathryn M. and Kelner, Merrijoy, “Informal Consent The Physician's Perspective,” Social Science and Medicine 24 (1987), no. 2, 135–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
8. Clements, Colleen D. and Fider, Roger C., “Suicide: Bad Act or Good Intervention,” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior 13 (1983), no. 1, 28–41CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; and Clements, Colleen D. and Fider, Roger C., “Medical Ethics' Assault upon Medical Values,” Journal of the American Medical Association 250 (1983), no. 15, 2011–2015CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.
9. Waitzkin, Howard, Second Illness: Contradictions of Capitalist Health Care (New York: Free Press, 1983), 142Google Scholar; and Sterr, Paul, The Social Transformation of American Medicine (New York: Basic Books, 1982), 14Google Scholar.
10. See Ellul, Jacques, The Technological Society (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1967)Google Scholar.
11. Freedman, Benjamin, “One Philosopher's Experience on an Ethics Committee,” Hastings Center Report 11 (1981), no. 2, 20–22CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.
12. See Dickens, Bernard, “Patients' Interests and Clients' Wishes: Physicians and Lawyers in Discord,” Law, Medicine and Health Care 15 (1987), no. 3, 110–117CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.
13. Burgess, Michael M., “Non-compliance and Overtreatment: Ethics and Economics,” Canadian Medical Association Journal (forthcoming)Google Scholar.
14. See Navarro, Vincente, Medicine Under Capitalism (New York: Prodist, 1976)Google Scholar.
15. Waitzkin, Howard, Second Illness, 214–238Google Scholar.
16. Engelherdt, H. Tristam, Foundations of Bioethics (New York: Oxford University Press), 44–56Google Scholar.