Show simple item record

dc.creatorHiggs, Rogeren
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T18:26:15Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T18:26:15Zen
dc.date.created1990-06en
dc.date.issued1990-06en
dc.identifier10.1136/jme.16.2.90en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Medical Ethics. 1990 Jun; 16(2): 90-92.en
dc.identifier.issn0306-6800en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=An+Obstructed+Death+and+Medical+Ethics+a+Case+Conference+revisited:+Commentary+2&title=Journal+of+Medical+Ethics.+&volume=16&issue=2&pages=90-92&date=1990&au=Higgs,+Rogeren
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.16.2.90en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/733454en
dc.description.abstractThe dilemma of whether or not a doctor should tell a patient dying of cancer the truth remains a difficult one, as the disagreement between the two previous writers shows. One favours giving priority to patient autonomy, the other feels the doctor's duty of beneficence should be the overriding principle governing such decisions. To this contributor it seems both approaches have something to offer. By being sensitive to what and how much the patient wishes to know and by learning from the insights provided by the study of medical ethics, doctors can learn how to make better moral decisions in this and in other areas. Both lying and truth-telling carry risks of harm to the patient. Learning to work with and balance these risks is part of clinical practice. So is minimising risks by clear thinking.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:KIE/31225en
dc.subjectAidsen
dc.subjectAutonomyen
dc.subjectBeneficenceen
dc.subjectCanceren
dc.subjectCase Studiesen
dc.subjectCommunicationen
dc.subjectDeathen
dc.subjectDeceptionen
dc.subjectDiagnosisen
dc.subjectDisclosureen
dc.subjectDoctorsen
dc.subjectEthicsen
dc.subjectHarmen
dc.subjectMedical Ethicsen
dc.subjectMoral Policyen
dc.subjectPatientsen
dc.subjectPhysician Patient Relationshipen
dc.subjectPhysiciansen
dc.subjectProfessional Patient Relationshipen
dc.subjectPrognosisen
dc.subjectRisks and Benefitsen
dc.subjectTerminal Careen
dc.subjectTerminally Illen
dc.subjectTrusten
dc.titleAn Obstructed Death and Medical Ethics -- a Case Conference Revisited: Commentary 2en
dc.provenanceDigital citation created by the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature at Georgetown University for the BIOETHICSLINE database, part of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics' Bioethics Information Retrieval Project funded by the United States National Library of Medicine.en
dc.provenanceDigital citation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named NBIO hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection BioethicsLine hosted by Georgetown University.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2022 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885