Skip to main content
Log in

Using empirical research to formulate normative ethical principles in biomedicine

  • Scientific Contribution
  • Published:
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Bioethical research has tended to focus on theoretical discussion of the principles on which the analysis of ethical issues in biomedicine should be based. But this discussion often seems remote from biomedical practice where researchers and physicians confront ethical problems. On the other hand, published empirical research on the ethical reasoning of health care professionals offer only descriptions of how physicians and nurses actually reason ethically. The question remains whether these descriptions have any normative implications for nurses and physicians? In this article, we illustrate an approach that integrates empirical research into the formulation of normative ethical principles using the moral-philosophical method of Wide Reflective Equilibrium (WRE). The research method discussed in this article was developed in connection with the project ‘Bioethics in Theory and Practice’. The purpose of this project is to investigate ethical reasoning in biomedical practice in Denmark empirically. In this article, we take the research method as our point of departure, but we exclusively discuss the theoretical framework of the method, not its empirical results. We argue that the descriptive phenomenological hermeneutical method developed by Lindseth and Norberg (2004) and Pedersen (1999) can be combined with the theory of WRE to arrive at a decision procedure and thus a foundation for the formulation of normative ethical principles. This could provide health care professionals and biomedical researchers with normative principles about how to analyse, reason and act in ethically difficult situations in their practice. We also show how to use existing bioethical principles as inspiration for interpreting the empirical findings of qualitative studies. This may help researchers design their own empirical studies in the field of ethics.

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

  • Beauchamp T.L. (2003). A Defense of the Common Morality. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13(3):259–274

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp T.L., Childress J.F. (1989). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 3rd ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp T.L., Childress J.F. (2001). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 5th ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen K. (2003). The Condition of Understanding in H.-G. Gadamer’s Philosophical Hermeneutics. Australia, The University of Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels N. (1979). Wide Reflective Equilibrium and Theory Acceptance in Ethics. Journal of Philosophy 76:257–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delden J.J.M. van (2002). Moral Intuitions as a Source for Empirical Ethics. Politeia XVIII(67):20–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Delden J.J.M., van Thiel G.J.M.W. Van (1998). Reflective Equilibrium as a Normative Empirical Model in Bioethics. In: van der Burg W., van Willigenburg T. (eds). Reflective Equilibrium. The Nederlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 251–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, H.-G.: 1960, Truth and Method. 2. rev. ed. translation revised by J. Weinsheimer and D. G. Marshall. New York: Continuum, 2003

  • Kappel, K.: 2006, ‘The Metajustification of Reflective Equilibrium’, Journal of Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. Forthcoming

  • Kvale S. (1983). The Qualitative Research Interview — A Phenomenological and a Hermeneutical Mode of Understanding. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 14:171–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kvale S. (1997). Interview. Denmark, Hans Reitzels Forlag

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindseth A., Norberg A. (2004). A Phenomenological Hermeneutical Method for Researching Lived Experience. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences 18:145–153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lindseth A., Marhaug V., Norberg A., Udén G. (1994). ‘Registered Nurses’ and Physicians’ Reflections on their Narratives about Ethically Difficult Care Episodes. Journal of Advanced Nursing 20:245–250

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loegstrup K.E. (1993). Norm and Spontaneity. Denmark: Gyldendal (first published in 1972)

    Google Scholar 

  • Loegstrup K.E. (1997). Concepts and Problems in Ethics. Denmark: Gyldendal (first published in 1971)

    Google Scholar 

  • Molewijk B., Stiggelbout A.M., Otten W., Dupuis H.M., Kievit J. (2004). Empirical Data and Moral Theory. A Plea for Integrated Empirical Ethics. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 7:55–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, B.D.: 1999, Nursing Practice, Language and Cognition. Ph.D.-Thesis, University of Aarhus, Denmark

  • Pedersen, B.D. and C. Delmar: 2003, ‘Research Method and Network Collaboration — A Qualitative Method inspired by Ricoeur’, in Research in Nursing Practice 2. Methods and Development of Knowledge. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag

  • Petersson B. (1998). Wide Reflective Equilibrium and the Justification of Moral Theory. In: van der Burg W., van Willigenburg T. (eds). Reflective Equilibrium. The Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 127–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J. (1951). Outline of a Decision Procedure for Ethics. In: Freeman S. (eds). John Rawls Collected Papers. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, pp. 1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Fourth Printing, 2001. Cambridge, MA. London: Belknap

  • Rawls J. (1975). The Independence of Moral Theory. In: Freeman S. (eds). John Rawls Collected Papers. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, pp. 286–303

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J. (2001). Justice as Fairness. A Restatement. Cambridge MA. London, Belknap

    Google Scholar 

  • Rendtorff, J. and P. Kemp: 2000, Basic Ethical Principles in European Bioethics and Biolaw. Vol. 1: Autonomy, Dignity, Integrity and Vulnerability. Denmark: Centre for Ethics and Law

  • Rossel P. (1986). Empirical Ethics — Its Necessity and Method’, Philosophia 14(3—4),90–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Scanlon T.M. (2003). Rawls on Justification. In: S. Freeman. (eds). The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Svenaeus F. (2003). Hermeneutics of Medicine in the Wake of Gadamer: The Issue of Phronesis. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24:407–431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Udén G., Norberg A., Lindseth A., Marhaug V. (1992). ‘Ethical Reasoning in Nurses’ and Physicians’ Stories about Care Episodes’, Journal of Advanced Nursing 17(9):1028–1034

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walters L., Palmer J. (1997). Ethics of Human Gene Therapy. New York, Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mette Ebbesen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ebbesen, M., Pedersen, B.D. Using empirical research to formulate normative ethical principles in biomedicine. Med Health Care Philos 10, 33–48 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-006-9011-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-006-9011-9

Keywords

Navigation