Social science & medicine
-
This paper examines the moral justification of medical paternalism. It is shown that while there are sufficient grounds to justify the practice of medical paternalism in some instances, there are many instances of the practice which cannot be justified. The application of the utilization principle of paternalism is considered in detail. ⋯ It is concluded that medical paternalism is justified only when utilitarian considerations apply and when they do not violate personal rights. This occurs only when the subject of paternalism is not fully competent, when he has explicitly or by implication given consent, or when it can be reasonably concluded, from the knowledge of his emotional and cognitive make up, that he would approve of such treatment. For the most part, only the physician with a more intimate knowledge of his patient than is possible in most modern medical practice is in the position to undertake medical paternalism with moral propriety.
-
Social science & medicine · Jan 1982
Helping and achieving. Compatible or competing goals for men and women in medical school?
This study investigates the attitudes of medical students toward oncology and examines the help- and achievement-orientations of males and females to ascertain whether these orientations are gender-related. Ninety freshmen, 125 sophomores, 83 juniors, and 87 senior medical students responded to questionnaires assessing their attitudes. ⋯ Helping and achieving were compatible goals for these women. Both male and female students were significantly more help-oriented by their senior year but they also felt significantly less effective in helping than did students in the first 3 years.
-
Social science & medicine · Jan 1981
Historical ArticleHistorical issues concerning animal experimentation in the United States.
The use of animals for research and teaching has now become an issue of great concern in the United States. In contrast to the legislative systems in Britain, Scandinavia and many European countries, American scientists can pursue research projects with relative freedom. Recent activities in the United States may effect this practice and future animal experimentation may be subjected to restriction and control by legislation. ⋯ It would reflect the success of animal protection groups in raising the consciousness and concerns of scientists about the humane treatment of experimental animals: (1) reducing the numbers of animals used for experimentation, (2) unnecessary duplication of experiments, and (3) minimizing pain and distress. Although scientists are proceeding toward a program(s) of self-regulation, this approach will be based on the scientific method and will not satisfy completely the differences between scientific and animal protection groups. Scientists have become concerned with "the moral and ethical responsibility for the humane treatment of animals in experimentation" whereas animal protection groups are concerned with "the moral rights of animals...."