Abstract
Pastoral theology carries the potential to refine the engagement between theology and a principlist approach to bioethics, as Nathan Carlin has argued in Pastoral Aesthetics, but it also provides a basis on which to specifically benefit pediatric bioethics by moving beyond simplistic renderings of children that reduce children to their nonautonomous status. Whereas principlist bioethics tends to regard children chiefly in relation to their lack of capacity to make autonomous decisions, pastoral theology’s interdisciplinary commitments and attention to relationality create possibilities for appreciating the subjectivity of children in the medical environment, respecting the moral weight of their healthcare experiences, and recognizing their agency to exert influence on the adults who make decisions and provide care for them.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anand, K. J. S., & Hickey, P. R. (1988). Pain and its effects in the human neonate and fetus. Pre- and Peri-Natal Psychology Journal, 3(2), 103–123.
Attig, T. (1996). Beyond pain: The existential suffering of children. Journal of Palliative Care, 12(3), 20–23.
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (1979). Principles of biomedical ethics (1st ed.). Oxford University Press.
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2009). Principles of biomedical ethics (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Bunge, M. J. (2006). The child, religion, and the academy: Developing robust theological and religious understandings of children and childhood. Journal of Religion, 86(4), 549–579.
Carlin, N. (2012). Bioethics and pastoral concern: Some possible new directions in pastoral theology. Pastoral Psychology, 62(2), 129–138.
Carlin, N. (2019). Pastoral aesthetics: A theological perspective on principlist bioethics. Oxford University Press.
Evans, J. H. (2002). Playing God? Human genetic engineering and the rationalization of public bioethical debate.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. Basic Books.
Lysaught, M. T. (2004). Respect: Or, how respect for persons became respect for autonomy. Journal of Medicine & Philosophy, 29(6), 665–680.
Miller-McLemore, B. J. (1996). The living human web: Pastoral theology at the turn of the century. In J. S. Moessner (Ed.), Through the eyes of women: Insights for pastoral care (pp. 9–26). Fortress Press.
Miller-McLemore, B. (2010). Children’s voices, spirituality, and mature faith. In A. Dillen & D. Pollefeyt (Eds.), Children’s voices: Children’s perspectives in ethics, theology and religious education (pp. 17–48). Peeters.
Mohrmann, M. E. (2006a). On being true to form. In C. Taylor & R. Dell’Oro (Eds.), Health and human flourishing: Religion, medicine, and moral anthropology (pp. 89–102). Georgetown University Press.
Mohrmann, M. E. (2006b). Whose interests are they, anyway? Journal of Religious Ethics, 34(1), 141–150.
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Pitkin, B. (2000). Are children human? Theology and Worship, Occasional Paper No. 12. Presbyterian Church (USA).
Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A., & Honig, M. -S. (2009). Why social studies of childhood? An introduction to the handbook. In J. Qvortrup, W. A. Corsaro, & M.-S. Honig, The Palgrave handbook of childhood studies (pp. 1–18). Palgrave Macmillan.
Wall, J. (2010). Review of Jerome W. Berryman, Children and the Theologians: Clearing the Way for Grace. Journal of Childhood and Religion, 1, 1–5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bratt Carle, J. Pastoral Aesthetics for Pediatric Bioethics. Pastoral Psychol 70, 607–615 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-021-00973-2
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-021-00973-2