Advertisement

Ethics and Information Technology

, Volume 3, Issue 3, pp 223–233 | Cite as

Technology and ethical dilemmas in a medical setting: Privacy, professional autonomy, life and death

  • Gloria Lankshear
  • David MasonEmail author
Article

Abstract

A growing literature addresses the ethicalimplications of electronic surveillance atwork, frequently assigning ethical priority tovalues such as the ‘right to privacy’. Thispaper suggests that, in practice, the issuesare sociologically more complex than someaccounts suggest. This is because manyworkplace electronic technologies not designedor deployed for surveillance purposesnevertheless embody surveillance capacity. Thiscapacity may not be immediately obvious toparticipants or lend itself to simpledeployment. Moreover, because of their primaryfunctions, such systems embody a range of otherfeatures which are potentially beneficial forthose utilising them. As a result, more complexethical dilemmas emerge as different desired ‘goods’ compete for priority in thedecision-making of individuals and groups. From a sociological point of view this raisesinteresting questions about the way ethicaldilemmas arise in the context of the ongoingsocial relationships of work. The paperexplores these issues using data from a studyof the development and implementation of acomputerised instructional package in amaternity setting. This medical settingillustrates clearly how seeking to assignethical priority to a particular concern, suchas the ‘right to privacy’, cannot butoversimplify the real day to day dilemmasencountered by participants. At the same time,the example of the instructional packagedemonstrates that it is difficult to predict inadvance what ethical issues will be raised bytechnologies that almost always turn out tohave a range of capabilities beyond thoseenvisaged in their original designspecification.

Keywords

Information System User Interface Ethical Issue Human Computer Interaction Ethical Dilemma 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. P. Bain and P. Taylor. Entrapped by the “Electronic Panopticon”? Worker Resistance in the Call Centre. New Technology, Work and Employment, 15 (1): 2–18, 2000.Google Scholar
  2. P. Barach and S.D. Small. Reporting and Preventing Medical Mishap: Lessons from Non-Medical Near Miss Reporting. British Medical Journal, 320 (7237): 759–763, 2000.Google Scholar
  3. J.F.R. Barrett, G.J. Jarvis, H.N. MacDonald, P.C. Buchan, S.N. Tyrell and R.J. Lilford. Inconsistencies in Clinical Decisions in Obstetrics. Lancet, 336: 549–551, 1990.Google Scholar
  4. Ulrich Beck. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage Publications, 1992.Google Scholar
  5. Confidential Enquiry into Stillbirths and Deaths in Infancy (CESDI). 4th Annual Report (1997) Concentrating on intrapartum related deaths 1994–95. Maternal and Child Health Research Consortium, Chiltern Court, Baker Street, London. NW1 5SD.Google Scholar
  6. F.T. De Dombal, V. Dallos and W.A.F. McAdam. Can Computer Aided Teaching Packages Improve Clinical Care In Patients With Acute Abdominal Pain?', British Medical Journal, 302: 1495–1497, 1991.Google Scholar
  7. M. Ennis and C.A. Vincent. Obstetric Accidents: A Review of 64 Cases. British Medical Journal, 300: 1365–1367, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. S. Fernie and D. Metcalf. (Not) Hanging on the Telephone: Payment Systems in the New Sweat Shops. London: Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. M. Ford. Surveillance and Privacy at Work. London: The Institute of Employment Rights, 1998.Google Scholar
  10. M. Foucault. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1979.Google Scholar
  11. C. Hampele and E. Hines. A Low-Cost Computer-Assisted Teaching Package for Kidney Dialysis: A Preliminary Report. Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology, 14 (4): 158–161, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. S.W.F. Holloway, N.D. Jewson and D.J. Mason. “Reprofessionalization” or “Occupational Imperialism”? Some Reflections on Pharmacy in Britain. Social Science and Medicine, 23 (2): 323–332, 1986.Google Scholar
  13. L.D. Introna. Workplace Surveillance, Privacy and Distributive Justice. Computers and Society, 30 (4): 33–39, 2000.Google Scholar
  14. T.J. Johnson. Professions and Power. London: Macmillan, 1972.Google Scholar
  15. R. Kling. Value Conflicts in Computing Developments' Telecommunications Policy, March 1983. In T. Forester, editor, Computers in the Human Context. London: Basil Blackwell, 1983.Google Scholar
  16. G. Lankshear, D. Mason, G. Button and S. Coates. Surveillancecapable Technology at Work: A Privacy Issue. Paper presented at the 17th Annual International Labour Process Conference, 29–31 March1999, School of Management, Royal Holloway, University of London, 1998.Google Scholar
  17. G. Lankshear, P. Cook, D. Mason, G. Button and S. Coates. Call Centre Employees' Responses to Electronic Monitoring: Some Research Findings. Work Employment and Society, 15 (3): 2001.Google Scholar
  18. G. Larkin. Occupational Monopoly and Modern Medicine. London: Tavistock, 1983.Google Scholar
  19. P.Y. Leberge, P. Marton and J. Racicot. Interactive Multimedia Computer Program on Ectopic Pregnancy and First Trimester Bleeding. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 17 (3): 187–191, 1997.Google Scholar
  20. M.A. Leigh. The Lawyer' View of Fetal Monitoring. Proc. Department of Health conference on fetal monitoring. Cumberland Lodge, Windsor. 28–29 January, 1993, pp. 33–40.Google Scholar
  21. D. Lyon and E. Zureik (eds.). Computers, Surveillance and Privacy. Mineapolis/London: University of Minesota, 1996.Google Scholar
  22. G.T. Marx. An Ethics for the New Surveillance. The Information Society, 14 (3): http://web.mit.edu/gtmarx/www/ncolin5.html, 1998.Google Scholar
  23. G.T. Marx and S. Sherizan. Monitoring on the Job. In T. Forrester, editor, Computers in the Human Context. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  24. J.H. Moor. Towards a Theory of Privacy in the Information Age. Computers and Society, Sept. 1997: 27–32, 1997.Google Scholar
  25. D.G. Morris. Using Telemedicine to Facilitate Training in Cardiotocography (CTG) Interpretation Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 6(Supplement 1), 2000.Google Scholar
  26. K. Mulholland. Back to the Future: A Call Centre and New Forms of Direct Control. Paper presented at the 17th International Labour Process Conference, School of Management, Royal Holloway, University of London, 29–31 March 1999.Google Scholar
  27. E.J. Ottensmeyer and McCarthy. Ethics in the Workplace. New York: McGraw Hill, 1996.Google Scholar
  28. Perri 6. The future of Privacy. Volume 1, Private Life and Public Policy. London: Demos, 1998.Google Scholar
  29. S. Rogerson and T.W. Bynum. Cyberspace: the Ethical Frontier. The Times Higher Education Supplement, June 9: iv, 1995.Google Scholar
  30. J.B. Rule. High-Tech Workplace Surveillance: What' Really New? In D. Lyon and E. Zureik, editors, Computers, Surveillance and Privacy. Minneapolis/London: University of Minnesota Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  31. G. Sewell and B. Wilkinson. Someone to Watch over Me: Surveillance, Discipline and the Just-In-Time Labour Process. Sociology, 26 (2): 279–282, 1992.Google Scholar
  32. R.A. Spinello. Ethical Aspects of Information Technology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1995.Google Scholar
  33. A. Westin. Two Key Factors that Belong in a Macroergonomic Analysis of Electronic Monitoring: Employee Perceptions of Fairness and the Climate of Organisational Trust or Distrust. Applied Ergonomics, 23/1: 35–42, 1992.Google Scholar
  34. T. Wilson and G. Mires. ‘Teacher Versus the Computer for Instruction: A Study’, British Journal of Midwifery, (6) 10: 655–658, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of PlymouthPlymouthUK
  2. 2.Department of SociologyUniversity of PlymouthPlymouthUK

Personalised recommendations