IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v30y1990i4p389-399.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clinical ethics: A role theoretic look

Author

Listed:
  • Agich, George J.

Abstract

The new phenomenon of clinical ethics is analyzed from a role theoretic perspective that differentiates consulting, teaching, watching, and witnessing. Teaching and consulting are seen as main role alternatives in clinical ethics practice, with watching and witnessing defining transitional states that reveal the complexity of clinical ethics. The problem of the legitimation of clinical ethics is discussed in terms of legal, professional, and social accountability and authorization. It is argued that the problem of legitimation is tied up with the related issue of expertise that, in turn, reflects the complex role alternatives of consulting, teaching, watching, and witnessing. Finally, the question of methodology and practice of clinical is explored in connection with the four role alternatives delineated.

Suggested Citation

  • Agich, George J., 1990. "Clinical ethics: A role theoretic look," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 389-399, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:30:y:1990:i:4:p:389-399
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(90)90341-O
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. van der Dam, Sandra & Schols, Jos M.G.A. & Kardol, Tinie J.M. & Molewijk, Bert C. & Widdershoven, Guy A.M. & Abma, Tineke A., 2013. "The discovery of deliberation. From ambiguity to appreciation through the learning process of doing Moral Case Deliberation in Dutch elderly care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 125-132.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:30:y:1990:i:4:p:389-399. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.