Show simple item record

dc.creatorKuhse, Helgaen
dc.creatorSinger, Peteren
dc.creatorRickard, Mauriceen
dc.creatorCannold, Leslieen
dc.creatorvan Dyk, Jessicaen
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T19:03:03Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T19:03:03Zen
dc.date.created1997-08en
dc.date.issued1997-08en
dc.identifier10.1136/jme.23.4.226en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Medical Ethics. 1997 Aug; 23(4): 226-232.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=Partial+and+Impartial+Ethical+Reasoning+in+Health+Care+professionals&title=Journal+of+Medical+Ethics.++&volume=23&issue=4&pages=226-232&date=1997&au=Kuhse,+Helgaen
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.23.4.226en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/754105en
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: To determine the relationship between ethical reasoning and gender and occupation among a group of male and female nurses and doctors. DESIGN: Partialist and impartialist forms of ethical reasoning were defined and singled out as being central to the difference between what is known as the "care" moral orientation (Gilligan) and the "justice" orientation (Kohlberg). A structured questionnaire based on four hypothetical moral dilemmas involving combinations of (health care) professional, non-professional, life-threatening and non-life-threatening situations, was piloted and then mailed to a randomly selected sample of doctors and nurses. SETTING: 400 doctors from Victoria, and 200 doctors and 400 nurses from New South Wales. RESULTS: 178 doctors and 122 nurses returned completed questionnaires. 115 doctors were male, 61 female; 50 nurses were male and 72 were female. It was hypothesised that there would be an association between feminine subjects and partialist reasoning and masculine subjects and impartialist reasoning. It was also hypothesised that nurses would adopt a partialist approach to reasoning and doctors an impartialist approach. No relationship between any of these variables was observed.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:MEDKIE/97425694en
dc.subjectCaringen
dc.subjectDoctorsen
dc.subjectEthical Analysisen
dc.subjectEthicsen
dc.subjectFamily Relationshipen
dc.subjectFemalesen
dc.subjectFormsen
dc.subjectHealthen
dc.subjectHealth Careen
dc.subjectJusticeen
dc.subjectLifeen
dc.subjectMalesen
dc.subjectMoral Developmenten
dc.subjectNursesen
dc.subjectPhysiciansen
dc.subjectProfessional Ethicsen
dc.subjectQualitative Researchen
dc.subjectQuestionnairesen
dc.subjectResearchen
dc.subjectSelection for Treatmenten
dc.subjectSocial worthen
dc.subjectSurveyen
dc.titlePartial and Impartial Ethical Reasoning in Health Care Professionalsen
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—2019 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885