1 / 12

Nonmaleficence in Professional Life

Nonmaleficence in Professional Life. Thomas Donlin-Smith, Professor of Religious Studies. Nonmaleficence in Professional Life. “First, do no harm”. What counts as harm?. Example: paternalism Motivated by benevolence yet experienced as harm.

tallys
Télécharger la présentation

Nonmaleficence in Professional Life

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Nonmaleficencein Professional Life Thomas Donlin-Smith, Professor of Religious Studies

  2. Nonmaleficence in Professional Life • “First, do no harm”

  3. What counts as harm? • Example: paternalism • Motivated by benevolence yet experienced as harm. • Best safeguard against paternalism – client’s voluntary, informed, competent consent • Voluntariness. Avoiding “controlling influences.” • Information. Levels & comprehension issues. • Competence. Can be difficult to ascertain. Means competence for this decision (not in general).

  4. Are some harms justifiable? • E.g., principle of veracity and the possibility of justifiable lies to and for clients. • What’s the harm in lies? • Much of professional life is based on trust and promises, either explicit or implicit. • False promises & broken promises may provide short term gain, but destroy trust. • Lies are ways of controlling & manipulating people, getting them to do things they would not otherwise do. Lies infringe on others’ autonomy. • The tendency to lie may be strengthened or diminished by the metaphor or model of relationship we are using.

  5. Conditions for justifying lies • Is this lie a last resort? Exhaust all truthful alternatives. • Weigh & assess the moral principles & issues at stake. Who is being protected & who is being hurt & why? Does the good outweigh the bad (utility)? • “Publicity test” - what would others say? How does this look from the dupe’s perspective? • Does the dupe have a right to the truth? Or is there a special latitude with truth permitted in this professional relationship? • Slippery slope concerns.

  6. Another type of harm in the professional-client relationship: privacy and confidentiality violations

  7. Two basic rules • Privacy – obligation to minimize invasions of client’s personal information • Client’s right to know what info is gathered & why • Confidentiality – obligation to protect client information • Client’s right to proper safeguards and to know about these safeguards

  8. Privacy & confidentiality are important because . . . • Deontologically: • They express basic respect. • A promise (at least implied) • Consequentially: • They maintain trust & encourage the full disclosure pros need in order to do their work • Virtue: • Don’t be a voyeuristic gossip!

  9. Limits on confidentiality rules? • May break confidence only when there is a duty to do so. May only when must. • Begin by asking for waiver of confidentiality • Better to violate confidence for the sake of preventing harms than to do good • Better for the sake of preventing harms to third parties than for the client’s own protection

  10. Considerations in confidentiality violations • Only as a last resort • Minimize the amount • Give the client a justification • Specific, legally required breeches of confidentiality: • Suspected child abuse • Bullet wounds • Selected communicable diseases • Threatened injury to third party

  11. Temptations to harm • What factors lead to professional misconduct, lack of “due care,” in professional practice? • How to enforce moral standards to prevent or punish misconduct? • See Banks McDowell, “The Excuses That Make Professional Ethics Irrelevant”

  12. Mike Martin on professional misconduct • Usually amounts to the triumph of private goods over public goods. • Religious ethics as antidote? • Two fundamental dangers in modern pro life: • conflict of interests of advising about & providing services • “hired gun” mentality that erodes personal responsibility

More Related