Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Law as Clinical Evidence: A New ConstitutiveModel of Medical Education and Decision-Making

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over several decades, ethics and law have been applied to medical education and practice in a way that reflects the continuation during the twentieth century of the strong distinction between facts and values. We explain the development of applied ethics and applied medical law and report selected results that reflect this applied model from an empirical project examining doctors’ decisions on withdrawing/withholding treatment from patients who lack decision-making capacity. The model is critiqued, and an alternative “constitutive” model is supported on the basis that medicine, medical law, and medical ethics exemplify the inevitable entanglement of facts and values. The model requires that ethics and law be taught across the medical education curriculum and integrated with the basic and clinical sciences and that they be perceived as an integral component of medical evidence and practice. Law, in particular, would rank as equal in normative authority to the relevant clinical scientific “facts” of the case, with graduating doctors having as strong a basic command of each category as the other. The normalization of legal knowledge as part of the clinician’s evidence base to be utilized in practice may provide adequate consolation for clinicians who may initially resent further perceived incursions on their traditional independence and discretion.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Box 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.ampcodirect.com.au/

References

  • Australian Medical Council. 2012. Standards for assessment and accreditation of primary medical programs by the Australian Medical Council. http://www.amc.org.au/images/Accreditation/FINAL-Standards-and-Graduate-Outcome-Statements-20-December-2012.pdf. Accessed November 21, 2016.

  • A Working Group, on behalf of the Association of Teachers of Ethics and Law in Australian and New Zealand Medical Schools (ATEAM). 2001. An ethics core curriculum for Australasian medical schools. Medical Journal of Australia 175(4): 205–210.

  • Callahan, D. 1993. The troubled dream of life. New York: Simon and Schuster.

  • Campbell, A. 2012. Teaching law in medical schools: First, reflect. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40(2): 301–310.

  • Doran, E., K. Fleming, C. Jordens, C. Stewart, J. Letts, and I. Kerridge. 2015. Part of the fabric and mostly right: An ethnography of ethics in clinical practice. Medical Journal of Australia 202(11): 587–590.

  • Dowie, A. 2011. Making sense of ethics and law in the medical curriculum. Medical Teacher 33(5): 384–387.

  • Foster, C., and J. Miola. 2015. Who’s in charge? The relationship between medical law, medical ethics, and medical morality. Medical Law Review 23(4): 505–530.

  • Fox, E., R.M. Arnold, and B. Brody. 1995. Medical ethics education: Past, present, and future. Academic Medicine 70(9): 761–769.

  • Fulford, K.W.M. 1989. Moral theory and medical practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • General Medical Council. 2015. Outcomes for graduates. http://www.gmc-uk.org/education/undergraduate/undergrad_outcomes.asp. Accessed November 21, 2016.

  • Goldenberg, M. 2005. Evidence-based ethics? On evidence-based practice and the “empirical turn” from normative bioethics. BMC Medical Ethics 6: 11.

  • Illich, I. 1976. Limits to medicine. Medical nemesis: The expropriation of health. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.

  • Illich, I., I.K. Zola, J McKnight, J. Caplan, and H. Shaiken. 1977. Disabling professions. London: Marion Boyars.

  • Jonsen, A. 1998. The Birth of bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • ____. 2000. A short history of medical ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Kennedy, I. 1981. The unmasking of medicine. London: Allen and Unwin.

  • Miles, S.H., L.W. Lane, J. Bickel, R.M. Walker, and C.K. Cassel. 1989. Medical ethics education: Coming of age. Academic Medicine 64(12): 705–714.

  • Moore, G.E. 1959. Principia ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Mormann, T. 2007. Carnap’s logical empiricism, values, and American pragmatism. Journal of General Philosophy of Science 38(1): 127–146.

  • National Center for Medical Legal Partnership. 2017. The need for medical legal partnership. http://medical-legalpartnership.org/need/. Accessed February 25, 2017.

  • Nickens, H.W. 1984. The scientific status of psychiatry within medicine. Journal of the National Medical Association 76(7): 699–703.

  • Parker, M. 2009. Two concepts of empirical ethics. Bioethics 23(4): 202–213.

  • Parker, M., L. Willmott, B. White, G. Williams, and C. Cartwright. 2015. Medical education and the law: Withholding/withdrawing treatment from adults without capacity. Internal Medicine Journal 45(6): 634–640.

  • Porter, R. 1997. The greatest benefit to mankind. A medical history of humanity from antiquity to the present. London: Harper Collins.

  • Preston-Shoot, M., and J. McKimm. 2010. Prepared for practice? Law teaching and assessment in UK medical schools. Journal of Medical Ethics 36(11): 694–699.

  • ____. 2011. Towards effective outcomes in teaching, learning and assessment of law in medical education. Medical Education 45(4): 339–346.

  • Putnam, H. 2002. The collapse of the fact/value distinction and other essays. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. 2005. CanMEDS 2005 Framework. http://www.royalcollege.ca/portal/page/portal/rc/common/documents/canmeds/framework/the_7_canmeds_roles_e.pdf. Accessed November 21, 2016.

  • Searle, J.R. 1995. The construction of social reality. London: Penguin.

  • Shelton, W. 2013. A new look at medicine and the mind-body problem: Can Dewey’s pragmatism help medicine connect with its mission? Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 56(3): 422–441.

  • Stirrat, G.M., C. Johnston, R. Gillon, and K. Boyd (on behalf of the Medical Education Working Group of the Institute of Medical Ethics and associated signatories). 2010. Medical ethics and law for doctors of tomorrow: The 1998 Consensus Statement updated. Journal of Medical Ethics 36(1): 55–60.

  • White, B., L. Willmott, C. Cartwright, M.H. Parker, and G. Williams 2014. Doctors’ knowledge of the law on withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining medical treatment. Medical Journal of Australia 201(4): 229–232.

  • White, B., L. Willmott, G. Williams, C. Cartwright, and M. Parker. 2016. The role of law in decisions to withhold and withdraw life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack capacity: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Medical Ethics 43(5): 327–333.

  • Willmott, L., B. White, C. Cartwright, M.Parker, G.M. Williams, and P. Neller. 2016a. Doctors’ perspectives on law and life-sustaining treatment: Survey design and recruitment strategies for a challenging cohort. Progress in Palliative Care 24(4): 213–220.

  • Willmott, L., B. White, M. Parker, C. Cartwright, and G. Williams. 2016b. Is there a role for law in medical practice when withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining medical treatment? Empirical findings on attitudes of doctors. Journal of Law and Medicine 24: 342–355.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to the two anonymous reviewers of the paper, whose comments and suggestions have clarified and strengthened the arguments it puts forward.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Malcolm Parker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Parker, M., Willmott, L., White, B. et al. Law as Clinical Evidence: A New ConstitutiveModel of Medical Education and Decision-Making. Bioethical Inquiry 15, 101–109 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-017-9836-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-017-9836-3

Keywords

Navigation