Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Clinical ethics as medical hermeneutics

  • Published:
Theoretical Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There are several branches of ethics. Clinical ethics, the one closest to medical decisionmaking, can be seen as a branch of medicine itself. In this view, clinical ethics is a unitary hermeneutics. Its rule is a guideline for unifying other theories of ethics in conjunction with the clinical context. Put another way, clinical ethics interprets the clinical situation in light of a balance of other values that, while guiding the decisionmaking process, also contributes to the very weighting of those values. The case itself originates ideas, not only about which value ought to predominate in its resolution, but also provides the origin of clinical rules that can be used in other cases. These are interpretive rules. Some examples of these rules are presented as well.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Engelhardt HT, Spicker S, eds.Philosophy and Medicine. Series for Dordrecht/Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1970 to the present.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Graber GC, Thomasma DC.Theory and Practice in Medical Ethics. New York: Continuum Publishing Co., 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Pellegrino ED, Thomasma DC.A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Engelhardt HT, Jr.The Foundations of Bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  5. MacIntyre, AC.Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry: Encyclopedia, Geneaology, and Tradition. Notre Dame, IN.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gadamer HG.Hermeneutics Versus Science?: Three German Views. Notre Dame, IN.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988. Also see Gadamer HG.Gesammelte Werke. Tübingen: Mohr, 1985-;Truth and Method. London: Sheed & Ward, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brody H.The Healer's Power. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pellegrino ED, Thomasma DC.A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fletcher J. Four indicators of humanhood: the enquiry matures.Hast Ctr Rep Dec. 1975;4:4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Toulmin S. The tyranny of principles.Hast Ctr Rep Dec. 1981;11:31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pellegrino ED, McElhinney TK.Teaching Ethics. Humanities, and Human Values in Medical Schools: A Ten-Year Overview. Washington, D.C.: Society for Health and Human Values, Institute on Human Values in Medicine, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pellegrino ED, Thomasma DC.A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jonsen A, Toulmin S.The Abuse of Casuistry. San Francisco, CA.: University of California Press, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  15. McIntyre A.After Virtue. 2nd Edition. Notre Dame, IN.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Jonsen AR. Casuistry as methodology in clinical ethics.Theor Med 1992;12:295–308.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tomlinson T. Casuistry in medical ethics: rehabilitated or repeat offender?Theor Med 1994;15(1):5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kopelman L. Case method and casuistry: the problem of bias.Theor Med 1994;15(1):21–37.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Thomasma DC. The context as moral rule in medical ethics.J. of Bioethics 1984;5:63–79.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Graber GC, Thomasma DC.Theory and Practice.

  21. Thomasma D. Beyond medical paternalism and patient autonomy: a model of physician's conscience for the doctor-patient relationship.Ann Int Med 1983;98:243–248.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bergsma J, Thomasma, D.Health Care: Its Psychosocial Dimensions. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  23. PSDA well received in hospitals, despite early confusion.Med Eth Advisor March 1992;8:25–35.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rouse F. Living wills in the long-term care setting.J Long-Term Care Adm Summer, 1988;17:14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mehling A. Living wills: preventing suffering or a deadly contract?State Govern News Dec 1988:14–15.

  26. Mehling A, Neitlich S. Right-to-die backgrounder.News from the Soc for the Right to Die (newsletter) Jan. 1989:1–2.

  27. Braithwaite S, Thomasma DC. New guidelines on foregoing life-sustaining treatment in incompetent patients: an anti-cruelty policy.Ann Int Med 1986;104:711–715.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Giere R. Science and technology studies: prospects for an enlightened postmodern synthesis.Science, Technology, & Human Values 1993;18:102–111.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Illich I.Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health. New York: Pantheon, 1976:106.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ibid:

    Google Scholar 

  31. Thomasma DC. Making treatment decisions for permanently unconscious patients: the ethical perspective. In Monagle JF, Thomasma DC, eds.Medical Ethics: A Guide for Health Professionals. Rockville, MD.: Aspen Publishers, 1988:192–204.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Le Carré J.The Secret Pilgrim. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1991:12.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Thomasma DC. Ethical aspects of geriatric care. In Calkins E, Ford AB, Katz PR, eds.Practice of Geriatrics. Philadelphia/London: W.B. Saunders Co., 1992:136–143.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Pellegrino ED. Informal judgements of competence and incompetence. In Gardell Cutter MA, Shelp EE, eds.Competency: A Study of Informal Competency Determination in Primary Care. Dordrecht/Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991:29–48.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Knight J. Judging competence: when the psychiatrist need, or need not, be involved. InCompetency, op. cit.:3–28.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Williams P. Why IRBS falter in reviewing risks and benefits.IRB 1984;6:3.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hilfiker D. Allowing the debilitated to die.New Engl J Med 1983;308:716–720.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Letters to editor, Allowing the debilitated to die.New Engl J Med 1983;308:862–863.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Hilfiker D. Response to letters to editor.New Engl J Med 1983;308:863.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ibid..

    Google Scholar 

  41. Cassell E. The function of medicine.Hast Ctr Rep 1977;7:16–19.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Thomasma DC, Pellegrino ED. The role of the family and physicians in decisions for incompetent patients.Theor Med 1987;8:283.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Morreim EH. Competence: at the intersection of law, medicine, and philosophy. InCompetency:93–126.

  44. Abernathy V. Judgements about patient competence: cultural and economic antecedents. InCompetency:211–226.

  45. Veatch R. An ethical framework for terminal care decision: a new classification of patients.J Am Ger Soc 1984;32:667.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Pellegrino, Thomasma.A Philosophical Basis.

  47. Goodin RE.Protecting the Vulnerable: A Re-Analysis of Our Social Responsibilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Veatch R.The Foundations of Justice: Why the Retarded and the Rest of Us Have Claims to Equality. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Veatch RM.A Theory of Medical Ethics. New York: Basic Books, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Loewy E. Treatment decisions in the mentally impaired: limiting but not abandoning treatment.New Engl J Med 1987;317:1465–1469.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Fletcher JF. Four indicators of humanhood: the enquiry matures.Hast Ctr Rep 1974;4(6):4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Cerne F. Mercy or murder? Physician's role in suicide spurs debate.AHA News July 2, 1990;26:1, 5.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Stanley JM, ed. The Appleton consensus: suggested international guidelines for decisions to forgo medical treatment.J Danish Med Assoc (Ugeskr Laeger) 1989;151(11):700–706; reprinted inJ Med Eth 1989;15:129–136.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Various Authors. The care of the dying: a symposium on the case of Betty Wright.Law Med Health Care 1989;17(3):205–268.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Jonsen A. What does life support support? In: Winslade W, ed.Personal Choices and Public Commitments: Perspectives on the Humanities. Galveston, TX.: Institute for the Medical Humanities, 1988:61–69. Quote:66–67.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Cassell C, Meier DE. Morals and moralism in the debate over euthanasia and assisted suicide.New Engl J Med 1990;323:750–752.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Conwell W, Rotenberg M, Caine ED. Completed suicide at age 50 and over.J Am Ger Soc 1990;38(6):640–644.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Humanities Program, Loyola University Chicago, 2160 South First Avenue, 60153, Maywood, IL, USA

    David C. Thomasma (Professor and Director)

Authors
  1. David C. Thomasma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thomasma, D.C. Clinical ethics as medical hermeneutics. Theoretical Medicine 15, 93–111 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994019

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994019

Key words