Skip to main content
Log in

Why physicians should not do ethics consults

  • Published:
Theoretical Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Increasing complexities facing physicians negotiating the bedside decision continue to fuel the debate over who is the appropriate party to offer ethics consults, should one be needed, during the decision-making process. Some very good arguments have been put forth on behalf of clinical ethicists as being the proper and best party to engage in ethics consultations. However, serious questions remain about the role of the clinical ethicist and his ability to provide the necessary level of objectivity called for in an ethics consult.

I argue that the clinician's professional psyche, or mode of thinking as a professional, leaves him little room to maneuver as an objective and detached third party ethics consultant. Several factors are cited and discussed that greatly influence the analyses applied to a case problem by physicians. The most formidable of these factors are habits and the practice of defensive medicine. I conclude that clinical ethicists are less suited for the overall tasks required of an objective consultant in medical cases that appear to involve insurmountable ethical issues.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Robertson JA. Ethics committees in hospitals: alternative structures and responsibility. Issues Law Med 1991; 7(1):83–91.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lo B. Behind closed doors: promises and pitfalls of ethics committees. N Engl J Med 1987; 317: 46–50.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Seigler M. Ethics committees: decisions by bureaucracy. Hastings Cent Rep 1986; 16: 22–4.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Thomasma DC. Why philosophers should offer ethics consultations. Theor Med 1991; 12: 129–40.

    Google Scholar 

  5. May WF. Code, covenant, contract, or philanthropy. Hastings Cent Rep 1975; 5(6): 29–38.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dworkin R. Law's Empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kopelmans LM, Irons TG, Kopelman AE. Neonatologists judge the ‘baby doe’ regulation. N Engl J Med 1988; 318: 677–83.

    Google Scholar 

  8. La Puma J, Schiedermayer DL. The clinical ethicist at the bedside. Theor Med 1991; 12: 141–9.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marsh, F.H. Why physicians should not do ethics consults. Theor Med Bioeth 13, 285–292 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00489205

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00489205

Key words

Navigation