Toward a reconstruction of medical morality

  • Edmund D. Pellegrino


At the center of medical morality is the healing relationship. It is defined by three phenomena: the fact of illness, the act of profession, and the act of medicine. The first puts the patient in a vulnerable and dependent position; it results in an unequal relationship. The second implies a promise to help. The third involves those actions that will lead to a medically competent healing decision. But it must also be good for the patient in the fullest possible sense. The physician cannot fully heal without giving the patient an understanding of alternatives such that he or she can freely arrive—together with the physician—at a decision in keeping with his or her personal morality and values. In today's pluralistic society, universal agreement on moral issues between physicians and patients is no longer possible. Nevertheless, a reconstruction of professional ethics based on a new appreciation of what makes for a true healing relationship between patient and physician is both possible and necessary.


Medical Morality Moral Issue Professional Ethic Healing Decision Dependent Position 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ba-Sela, Ariel, and Hoff, Habbel E. “Isaac Israeli's Fifty Admonitions to the Physician.” InLegacies in Ethics and Medicine. New York: Science History Publications, 1977.Google Scholar
  2. Benarde, M., and Mayerson, E.W. “Patient-Physician Negotiation.”Journal of the American Medical Association 239 (April 1978): 14–15.Google Scholar
  3. Burns, Chester. “American Medical Ethics: Some Historical Roots.” InPhilosophical Medical Ethics: Its Nature and Significance, edited by Stuart Spicker and H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1977.Google Scholar
  4. Cabot, Richard. “The Use of Truth and Falsehood in Medicine, an Experimental Study.” InEthics in Medicine, edited by S. Reiser et al. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press. 1977.Google Scholar
  5. Cassell, Eric. “Autonomy and Ethics in Action.”New England Journal of Medicine 6 (August 1977): 333–34.Google Scholar
  6. Cicero on Moral Obligation: A New Translation of Cicero's “DeOficiis.” Bks. 1 and 2. Introduction and notes by John Higinbotham. Berkeley: University of California Press. 1967.Google Scholar
  7. Deichgraber, Karl.Professio medici zum Vorwort des Scribonius Largus. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1950.Google Scholar
  8. Edelstein, L.The Hippocratic Oath: Test, Translation and Interpretation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1943.Google Scholar
  9. Edelstein, L. “The Professional Ethics of the Greek Physician.” InAncient Medicine, edited by Owsei Temkin and C. Lillian Temkin. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1967.Google Scholar
  10. Gert, Bernard.The Moral Rules. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1973.Google Scholar
  11. Hippocrates. Translated by W.H.S. Jones. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1923.Google Scholar
  12. Hooker, Worthington.Physician and Patient, a Practical View of Medical Ethics. New York: Arno Press, 1849.Google Scholar
  13. Jones, W.H.S.Philosophy and Medicine in Ancient Greece. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1946.Google Scholar
  14. Jonsen, A.E., and Hellegers, A.E. InConceptual Foundations for an Ethics of Medical Care, edited by L. Tancredi. Washington, D.C., 1974Google Scholar
  15. Levey, Martin. “Medical Ontology in Ninth Century Islam.” InLegacies in Ethics and Medicine, edited by Chester Burns. New York: Science History Publications, 1977.Google Scholar
  16. Marcus Aurelius.Meditations. Translated by George Long. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1960.Google Scholar
  17. Nortell, Bruce. “AMA Judicial Activities.”Journal of the American Medical Association 239 (April 1978): 1396–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Owens, Joseph “Aristotelian Ethics, Medicine and the Changing Nature of Man.” InPhilosophical Medical Ethics: Its Nature and Significance, edited by Stuart Spicker and H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr. Vol. 3. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1977.Google Scholar
  19. Pellegrino, E.D. “Toward an Expanded Medical Ethics: The Hippocratic Ethic Revisited.” InHippocrates Revisited, edited by Roger J. Bulger. New York: MEDCOM Press. 1973.Google Scholar
  20. Pellegrino, E.D. “The Anatomy of Clinical Judgments: Some Notes on Right Reason and Right Action.” Paper presented at the Fifth Trans-Disciplinary Symposium on Philosophy and Medicine: Clinical Judgment, University of California School of Medicine, Los Angeles, April 14–16, 1977.Google Scholar
  21. Pellegrino, E.D.Humanism and the Physician. Knoxville, Tenn.: University of Tennessee Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  22. Pellegrino, E.D., and Thomasma, D.C.A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice: Toward a Philosophy and Ethic of the Healing Professions. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
  23. Pellegrino, E.D. “Toward a Reconstruction of Medical Morality: The Primacy of the Act of Profession and the Fact of Illness.”Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, Vol. 4:1, March 1979, pp. 32–56 (University of Chicago Press).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Percival, Thomas,Medical Ethics. Huntington, N.Y.: Robert Krieger, 1975.Google Scholar
  25. Scribonius Largus.Compositions, edited by Georgius Helmreich. Stuttgart: B.G. Teubner, 1887.Google Scholar
  26. Spicker, Stuart. “Medicine's Influence on Ethics: Reflections on the Putative Moral Role of Medicine.” InPhilosophical Medical Ethics: Its Nature and Significance, edited by Stuart Spicker and H. Tristam Englehardt, Jr. Vol. 3. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1977.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edmund D. Pellegrino

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations