Show simple item record

dc.creatorEngelhardt, H. Tristramen
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T19:03:25Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T19:03:25Zen
dc.date.created1998-12en
dc.date.issued1998-12en
dc.identifier10.1076/jmep.23.6.643.2555en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Medicine and Philosophy. 1998 Dec; 23(6): 643-651.en
dc.identifier.issn0360-5310en
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=Critical+Care:+Why+There+Is+No+Global+Bioethics&title=Journal+of+Medicine+and+Philosophy.++&volume=23&issue=6&pages=643-651&date=1998&au=Engelhardt,+H.+Tristramen
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1076/jmep.23.6.643.2555en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/754696en
dc.description.abstractThe high technology and the costs involved in critical care disclose the implausibility of applying the American standard version of bioethics in the developing world. The American standard version of bioethics was framed during the rapid secularization of the American culture, the emergence of a new image for the medical profession, the development of high technology medicine, an ever greater demand in resources, and a shift of focus from families and communities to individuals. This all brought with it a particular ideology of health care which promised Americans (1) the best of care, (2) equal care, and (3) physician/patient choice, without (4) runaway costs. This essay argues that this moral project is impossible in practice. This impossibility is especially salient in developing countries. In addition to the fact that it is financially impossible to provide all in the developing world with the standard of care accepted by law, policy, and convention in developed countries, different moral perspectives with different orderings of values will seem more or less plausible in different cultures. Indeed, such an approach would be harmful. A concrete bioethics applicable across the world does not appear possible.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:MEDKIE/99205121en
dc.subjectAutonomyen
dc.subjectBioethicsen
dc.subjectCritically Illen
dc.subjectCultural Pluralismen
dc.subjectCultureen
dc.subjectConsenten
dc.subjectDeveloped Countriesen
dc.subjectDeveloping Countriesen
dc.subjectEconomicsen
dc.subjectEthical Relativismen
dc.subjectHealthen
dc.subjectHealth Careen
dc.subjectInformed Consenten
dc.subjectInternational Aspectsen
dc.subjectJusticeen
dc.subjectLawen
dc.subjectMedicineen
dc.subjectMoralityen
dc.subjectNon-Western Worlden
dc.subjectPublic Policyen
dc.subjectQuality of Health Careen
dc.subjectResource Allocationen
dc.subjectSecularismen
dc.subjectStandardsen
dc.subjectTechnologyen
dc.subjectThird Party Consenten
dc.subjectValuesen
dc.subjectWestern Worlden
dc.titleCritical Care: Why There Is No Global Bioethicsen
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