Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 195–202 | Cite as

Why comply with a code of ethics?

  • Georg SpielthennerEmail author
Scientific Contribution


A growing number of professional associations and occupational groups are creating codes of ethics with the goal of guiding their members, protecting service users, and safeguarding the reputation of the profession. There is a great deal of literature dealing with the question to what extent ethical codes can achieve their desired objectives. The present paper does not contribute to this debate. Its aim is rather to investigate how rational it is to comply with codes of conduct. It is natural and virtually inevitable for a reflective person to ask why one should pay any attention to ethical codes, in particular if following a code is not in one’s own interest. In order to achieve the aim of this paper, I shall (in “Quasi-reasons for complying with an ethical code” section) discuss reasons that only appear to be reasons for complying with a code. In “Code-independent reasons” section, I shall present genuine practical reasons that, however, turn out to be reasons of the wrong kind. In “Code-dependent reasons” section finally presents the most important reasons for complying with ethical codes. The paper argues that while ethical codes do not necessarily yield reasons for action, professionals can have genuine reasons for complying with a code, which may, however, be rather weak and easily overridden by reasons for deviating from the code.


Codes of ethics Compliance with a code Following a code Practical reasoning Professional codes 


  1. Atiyah, P.S. 1979. Promises and the law of contract. Mind 88(351): 410–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker, R., and L. Emanuel. 2000. The efficacy of professional ethics: The AMA code of ethics in historical and current perspective. The Hastings Center Report 30(4): S13–S17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banks, S. 2003. From oaths to rulebooks: A critical examination of codes of ethics for the social professions. European Journal of Social Work 6(2): 133–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barker, R.L. 1988. Just whose code of ethics should the independent practitioner follow? Journal of Independent Social Work 2(4): 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beauchamp, T.L., and J.F. Childress. 2009. Principles of biomedical ethics, 6th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Brink, D.O. 1992. A puzzle about the rational authority of morality. In Philosophical perspectives (vol. 6): Ethics, ed. J.E. Tomberlin, 1–26. Atascadero: Ridgeview Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  7. Carlson, R.V., K.M. Boyd, and D.J. Webb. 2004. The revision of the declaration of Helsinki: Past, present and future. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 57(6): 695–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dienhart, J. 1995. Rationality, ethical codes, and an egalitarian justification of ethical expertise: Implications for professions and organizations. Business Ethics Quarterly 5(3): 419–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dobson, J. 2005. Monkey business: A neo-Darwinist approach to ethics codes. Financial Analysts Journal 61(3): 59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Durning, P. 2003. Two problems with deriving a duty to obey the law from the principle of fairness. Public Affairs Quarterly 17(4): 253–264.Google Scholar
  11. Foot, P. 1972. Morality as a system of hypothetical imperatives. The Philosophical Review 81(3): 305–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gert, B. 1998. Morality: Its nature and justification. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Goldman, A.H. 2006. The rationality of complying with rules: Paradox resolved. Ethics 116: 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodyear, M.D., T. Lemmens, D. Sprumont, and G. Tangwa. 2009. The FDA and the declaration of Helsinki. British Medical Journal 338: 1157–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hampton, J. 1995. Does Hume have an instrumental conception of practical reason? Hume Studies 21(1): 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harsanyi, J.C. 1985. Does reason tell us what moral code to follow and, indeed, to follow any moral code at all? Ethics 96(1): 42–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heymans, R., A. van der Arend, and C. Gastmans. 2007. Dutch nurses’ views on codes of ethics. Nursing Ethics 14(2): 156–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones, D.H. 1966. Making and keeping promises. Ethics 76(4): 287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Joyce, N.R., and T.J. Rankin. 2010. The lessons of the development of the first APA ethics code: Blending science, practice, and politics. Ethics and Behavior 20(6): 466–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morin, K. 2005. Code of ethics for bioethics: Medicine’s lessons worth heeding. The American Journal of Bioethics 5(5): 60–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nielsen, K. 1984. Why should I be moral? Revisited. American Philosophical Quarterly 21(1): 81–91.Google Scholar
  22. Raz, J. 1999. Practical reason and norms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ross, W.D. 1930. The right and the good. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  24. Schwitzgebel, E. 2009. Do ethicists steal more books? Philosophical Psychology 22(6): 711–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Searle, J. 1964. How to derive “ought” from “is”. The Philosophical Review 73(1): 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sharp, F.C. 1934. The ethics of breach of contract. International Journal of Ethics 45(1): 27–53.Google Scholar
  27. Spielthenner, G. 2012. Justificatory reasons for action. The European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 8(2): 56–72.Google Scholar
  28. Starr, W.C. 1983. Codes of ethics: Towards a rule-utilitarian justification. Journal of Business Ethics 2(2): 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Verbeek, B. 2007. The authority of norms. American Philosophical Quarterly 44(3): 245–258.Google Scholar
  30. Von Wright, G.H. 1983. Practical reason: Philosophical papers, vol. 1. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  31. Weller, S. 1988. The effectiveness of corporate codes of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 7(5): 389–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. World Medical Association (2009). Medical ethics manual, 2nd ed.
  33. World Medical Association (2013). Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and Religious StudiesUniversity of Dar es SalaamDar es SalaamTanzania

Personalised recommendations