Bioethics to the rescue! A response to Emmerich
Authors: Hardman, D. and Hutchinson, P.
Journal: Journal of Medical Ethics
Volume: 48
Issue: 11
Pages: 887
eISSN: 1473-4257
ISSN: 0306-6800
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2022-108304
Abstract:In our article, Where the ethical action is, we argue that medical and ethical modes of thought are not different in kind but merely different aspects of a clinical situation. In response, Emmerich argues that in so doing, we neglect several important features of healthcare and medical education. Although we applaud the spirit of Emmerich's response, we argue that his critique is an attempt at a general defence of the value of bioethical expertise in clinical practice, rather than a specific critique of our account.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/36936/
Source: Scopus
Bioethics to the rescue! A response to Emmerich.
Authors: Hardman, D. and Hutchinson, P.
Journal: J Med Ethics
eISSN: 1473-4257
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2022-108304
Abstract:In our article, Where the ethical action is, we argue that medical and ethical modes of thought are not different in kind but merely different aspects of a clinical situation. In response, Emmerich argues that in so doing, we neglect several important features of healthcare and medical education. Although we applaud the spirit of Emmerich's response, we argue that his critique is an attempt at a general defence of the value of bioethical expertise in clinical practice, rather than a specific critique of our account.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/36936/
Source: PubMed
Bioethics to the rescue! A response to Emmerich Response
Authors: Hardman, D. and Hutchinson, P.
Journal: JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS
Volume: 48
Issue: 11
Pages: 887
eISSN: 1473-4257
ISSN: 0306-6800
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2022-108304
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/36936/
Source: Web of Science (Lite)
Bioethics to the rescue! A response to Emmerich
Authors: Hardman, D. and Hutchinson, P.
Journal: Journal of Medical Ethics
Publisher: BMJ
ISSN: 0306-6800
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2022-108304
Abstract:In our article, Where the ethical action is, we argue that that medical and ethical modes of thought are not different in kind but merely different aspects of a clinical situation. In response, Emmerich argues that in so doing we neglect several important features of healthcare and medical education. Although we applaud the spirit of Emmerich’s response, we argue that his critique is an attempt at a general defence of the value of bioethical expertise in clinical practice, rather than a specific critique of our account.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/36936/
Source: Manual
Preferred by: Doug Hardman
Bioethics to the rescue! A response to Emmerich.
Authors: Hardman, D. and Hutchinson, P.
Journal: Journal of medical ethics
Pages: medethics-2022-108304
eISSN: 1473-4257
ISSN: 0306-6800
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2022-108304
Abstract:In our article, Where the ethical action is, we argue that medical and ethical modes of thought are not different in kind but merely different aspects of a clinical situation. In response, Emmerich argues that in so doing, we neglect several important features of healthcare and medical education. Although we applaud the spirit of Emmerich's response, we argue that his critique is an attempt at a general defence of the value of bioethical expertise in clinical practice, rather than a specific critique of our account.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/36936/
Source: Europe PubMed Central
Bioethics to the rescue! A response to Emmerich.
Authors: Hardman, D. and Hutchinson, P.
Journal: Journal of Medical Ethics
Volume: 48
Issue: 11
Pages: 887
Publisher: BMJ
ISSN: 0306-6800
Abstract:In our article, Where the ethical action is, we argue that that medical and ethical modes of thought are not different in kind but merely different aspects of a clinical situation. In response, Emmerich argues that in so doing we neglect several important features of healthcare and medical education. Although we applaud the spirit of Emmerich’s response, we argue that his critique is an attempt at a general defence of the value of bioethical expertise in clinical practice, rather than a specific critique of our account.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/36936/
Source: BURO EPrints