× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
c
6
r
4
c
3
m
3
h
3
1
3
n
3
s
3
d
3
c
3
r
3
e
3
New Topic  
hamzawild6 hamzawild6
wrote...
Posts: 705
Rep: 0 0
6 years ago

A requirement for serving on a hospital ethics committee is willingness to maintain
  confidentiality. Doctors are professionally required to observe confidentiality as regards
  information about their patients. It is sometimes argued that professors of ethics, in spite of
  their relevant training, are not suitable for ethics committees because they do not have an
  obligation of confidentiality. However, the fact is that professors must observe
  confidentiality just as doctors do. For professors it is a duty to keep confidential information
  they learn about their students. Thus, since both have a duty of confidentiality, it is
  unjustifiable to exclude professors from ethics committees on grounds of confidentiality.


 
  What will be an ideal response?
Read 52 times
2 Replies

Related Topics

Replies
wrote...
6 years ago

(Argument from analogy. It is argued that both cases should be treated the same
because, it is claimed, they are relevantly similar. They are indeed similar in virtue
of being obliged to keep confidences. They are not similar in virtue of the clients to
whom they have their obligations or to the kinds of information they are obliged to
keep. The objection to professors serving on ethics committees is based on a false
analogy, since both groups do have a duty of confidentiality. The objection would
have to be reframed: professors do not have a duty to patients.)

hamzawild6 Author
wrote...
6 years ago
Excellent response
New Topic      
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  1100 People Browsing
Related Images
  
 229
  
 343
  
 1033
Your Opinion
What's your favorite funny biology word?
Votes: 401