Loading...
A Commentary in Response to: By What Authority? Conflicts of Interest in Professional Ethics
Bloch, Sidney
Bloch, Sidney
Author(s)
Bloch, Sidney
Author(s) (Additional)
Illustrator(s)
Producer(s)
Contributor(s)
Contributor(s) (Other)
Editor(s)
Advisor(s)
Contact(s)
Data Collector(s)
Collections
Files
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Online Access
Abstract
"[...] A case could be made for pragmatism, particularly in the form of an agreed upon code of ethics for ethicists. This could contain core principles and associated practically-oriented annotations to guide ethics consultants in their work. Robert Baker1 has suggested just that in proposing that bioethicists should devise a series of guidelines for their own job of assisting other professions to deal with ethical challenges and quandaries. He has also offered a draft code to his colleagues for their deliberation. His argument revolves around the concept of codes reflecting the “professionalisation” of a group of practitioners who should assert the “integrity and independence” of their enterprise, and offer to themselves and to the public an “… authoritative interpretation of its mission, ideals and practices..” Baker’s draft code, including its section on conflicts of interests, is reasonably clear and coherent. Thus, ethicists should avoid, and refuse to be involved in, situations that create or appear to create conflicts of interests; they should not serve as consultants where they have “conflicting clinical and/or administrative responsibilities, or intellectual or financial interests.” [...]", p. 1
Note(s)
Topic
Type
Article
Date
2008-11
Identifier
ISBN
DOI
Copyright/License
With permission of the license/copyright holder