Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mediation

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics

  • 152 Accesses

Abstract

Management of clinical disputes in healthcare is a universally acknowledged concern. The traditional, recommendation-focused model of clinical ethics consultation (CEC) employed by hospital ethics committees (HECs) or their designees has been criticized, while bioethics mediation has been increasingly embraced, in theory, as an alternative approach to the delivery of CEC. Unfortunately, the endorsement of mediation has arrived in the absence of consensus as to its implementation and to the training and credentialing of its practitioners. As a result, there have been few dedicated bioethics mediation programs in US medical institutions. This entry begins with a description of mediation as a dispute resolution process and a brief history of bioethics mediation. It then focuses on the ethical dimensions of bioethics mediation along with theoretical and practical controversy in the bioethics community that has impeded widespread adoption of a bioethics mediation model for the management of CEC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. (1998). Task force report on ethics consultation, Core competencies, 6–8, American Society for Bioethics and Humanities, Glenview, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. (2011). Task force report on core competencies for healthcare ethics consultation, 24

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergman, E. (2013). Surmounting elusive barriers: The case for bioethics mediation. Journal of Clinical Ethics, 24(1), 11–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charon, R., & Montello, M. (2002). Stories matter: The role of narrative in medical ethics. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danner Clouser, K., & Gert, B. (1997). A critique of principlism. In Bioethics: An introduction to the history, methods, and practice. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubler, N., & Liebman, C. (2011). Bioethics Mediation: A guide to shaping shared solutions, 2d ed., Nashville: Vanderbilt university press. (2004) 1st ed., New York:United Hospital Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubler, N., Webber, M., Swiderski, D., & Faculty and the National Working Group for the Clinical Ethics Credentialing Project. (2009). Charting the future: Credentialing, privileging, quality, and evaluation in clinical ethics consultation. Hastings Center Report, 39(6), 23–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiester, A. (2014). Mediation and the end of clinical ethics as we know it. Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Journal of Conflict Resolution, 15(2), 501–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, E., Myers, S., & Pearlman, R. (2007). Ethics consultation in United States hospitals: A national survey. American Journal of Bioethics, 7(2), 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, D. (1994). Mediating life and death decisions. Arizona Law Review, 36, 821–877.

    Google Scholar 

  • HOPE Report. (2012). Mediation in healthcare. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, C. (1996). The mediation process: Practical strategies for resolving conflict. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, C. (2014). Ethics consultations and conflict engagement in health care. Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Journal of Conflict Resolution, 15(2), 363–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shell, G. R. (2006). Bargaining for advantage. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M. (1993). Keeping moral space open: New images of ethics consulting. Hastings Center Report, 23(2), 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Further Readings

  • Bergman, E. (2014). Managing conflict in clinical health care with diminished reliance on third party intervention: Forging an ethical and legal mandate for effective physician-patient communication. Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Journal of Conflict Resolution, 15(2), 473–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergman, E., & Fiester, A. (2014). The future of clinical ethics education: Value pluralism, communication, and mediation. In A. Akabayashi (Ed.), The future of bioethics international dialogues (pp. 703–711). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fiester, A. (2015). Neglected ends in healthcare ethics consultation: Bioethics mediation & the prospects for closure. American Journal of Bioethics, 15(1), 29–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Edward J. Bergman & Autumn M. Fiester

Authors
  1. Edward J. Bergman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Autumn M. Fiester
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edward J. Bergman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Duquesne University Center for Healthcare Ethics, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

    Henk ten Have

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this entry

Cite this entry

Bergman, E.J., Fiester, A.M. (2015). Mediation. In: ten Have, H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_280-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_280-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05544-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation