Echo calling narcissus: What exceeds the gaze of clinical ethics consultation?

Center for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203, USA.
HEC Forum 03/2010; 22(1):73-84. DOI: 10.1007/s10730-010-9123-8
Source: PubMed


Guiding our response in this essay is our view that current efforts to demarcate the role of the clinical ethicist risk reducing its complex network of authorizations to sites of power and payment. In turn, the role becomes susceptible to various ideologies-individualisms, proceduralisms, secularisms-that further divide the body from the web of significances that matter to that body, where only she, the patient, is located. The security of policy, standards, and employment will pull against and eventually sever the authorization secured by authentic moral inquiry. Instead of asking "What do I need to know?", the question animating the drive to standardize will be "What is the policy or standard?" The claims of the authors in this issue of HEC Forum confirm these suspicions.

10 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Clinical ethics literature typically presents ethics consultations as having clear beginnings and clear ends. Experience in actual clinical ethics practice, however, reflects a different characterization, particularly when the moral experiences of ethics consultants are included in the discussion. In response, this article emphasizes listening and learning about moral experience as core activities associated with clinical ethics consultation. This focus reveals that responsibility in actual clinical ethics practice is generated within the moral scope of an ethics consultant's activities as she or he encounters the unique and specific features that emerge from interactions with a specific patient, or family, or practitioner within a given situation and over time. A long-form narrative about an ethics consultant's interactions is interwoven with a more didactic discussion to highlight the theme of responsibility and to probe questions that arise regarding follow-up within the practice of clinical ethics consultation.
    Bioethics 09/2011; 25(7):413-24. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01910.x · 1.48 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article outlines one element of the work carried out by a group of Canadian ethicists [Practicing Healthcare Ethicists Exploring Professionalization (PHEEP)]-to begin the deliberative development of a set of practice standards for the Canadian context. To provide a backdrop, this article considers the nature and purpose of practice standards as they are used by regulated professions and how they relate to other practice-defining texts such as competencies, codes of ethics and statements of scope of practice. A comparative review of current practice-defining documents developed within the field of healthcare ethics practice suggests that practice standards are not yet among them. A review of the practice standards and related texts articulated by various other professions, both regulated and not yet regulated, indicates that while these groups of documents serve to define and clarify various dimensions of practice in individual disciplines, there is no clear standardized approach to the terminology, structure and content across these documents. It is suggested that this variability presents a degree of flexibility that ought to allay many of the anxieties that have been expressed about practice standards in healthcare ethics: practitioners, PHEs, are at liberty to define their practice as they see fit, albeit within reasonable parameters if regulation is sought. A proposal for a draft structure and potential content for Canadian healthcare ethics practice standards is offered.
    HEC Forum 08/2012; 24(3):203-17. DOI:10.1007/s10730-012-9186-9
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: With the increased costs of health care, hospitals have put increased pressure on chaplains to show efficiency and effectiveness. In addition, with the drive of evidence-based medicine, new techniques of spiritual assessment are being created, allowing chaplains to demonstrate their effectiveness. In this paper, I demonstrate the circular nature of the construction of these tools of spiritual assessment and argue that they are created in the image and likeness of generic chaplaincy. I also demonstrate how these tools come to direct spiritual therapy. However, these spiritual assessments and therapies are idols and ersatz liturgies directed at medical rather than spiritual ends. I conclude with a reflection on Jean-Luc Marion's distinction between idol and icon, and argue that only the true Liturgy of the Church can deliver true grace, true spiritual therapy.© The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of The Journal of Christian Bioethics, Inc. All rights reserved.
    Christian Bioethics 12/2013; 19(3):332-347. DOI:10.1093/cbcbt024
Show more