Background Medical ethics has recently seen a drive away from multiple prescriptive approaches, where physicians are inundated with guidelines and principles, towards alternative, less deontological perspectives. This represents a clear call for theory building that does not produce more guidelines. Phronesis (practical wisdom) offers an alternative approach for ethical decision-making based on an application of accumulated wisdom gained through previous practice dilemmas and decisions experienced by practitioners. Phronesis, as an ‘executive virtue’, offers a way to navigate the practice virtues for any given case to reach a final decision on the way forward. However, very limited empirical data exist to support the theory of phronesis-based medical decision-making, and what does exist tends to focus on individual practitioners rather than practice-based communities of physicians. Methods The primary research question was: What does it mean to medical practitioners to make ethically wise decisions for patients and their communities? A three-year ethnographic study explored the practical wisdom of doctors (n = 131) and used their narratives to develop theoretical understanding of the concepts of ethical decision-making. Data collection included narrative interviews and observations with hospital doctors and General Practitioners at all stages in career progression. The analysis draws on neo-Aristotelian, MacIntyrean concepts of practice- based virtue ethics and was supported by an arts-based film production process. Results We found that individually doctors conveyed many different practice virtues and those were consolidated into fifteen virtue continua that convey the participants’ ‘collective practical wisdom’, including the phronesis virtue. This study advances the existing theory and practice on phronesis as a decision-making approach due to the availability of these continua. Conclusion Given the arguments that doctors feel professionally and personally vulnerable in the context of ethical decision-making, the continua in the form of a video series and app based moral debating resource can support before, during and after decision-making reflection. The potential implications are that these theoretical findings can be used by educators and practitioners as a non-prescriptive alternative to improve ethical decision-making, thereby addressing the call in the literature, and benefit patients and their communities, as well.

A vulnerable participant in research lacks capacity to consent or may be exposed to coercion to participate. Capacity may be temporarily impaired due to loss of consciousness, hypoxia, pain and the consumption of alcohol or elicit substances. To advance emergency care, providing life-threatening measures in life-threatening circumstances, vulnerable patients are recruited into research studies. The urgent need for time-critical treatment conflicts with routine informed consent procedures. This article reviews ethical considerations and moral obligations to safeguard these participants and preserve their autonomy. A particular focus is given to research methodology to waive consent, and the role of ethics committees, research audits, research nurses and community engagement. Research on the acutely unwell patient who lacks capacity is possible with well-designed research trials that are led by investigators who are sufficiently trained, engage the community, gain ethical approval to waive consent and continuously audit practice. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:73-79. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.180051

BackgroundMedical ethics has recently seen a drive away from multiple prescriptive approaches, where physicians are inundated with guidelines and principles, towards alternative, less deontological perspectives. This represents a clear call for theory building that does not produce more guidelines. Phronesis (practical wisdom) offers an alternative approach for ethical decision-making based on an application of accumulated wisdom gained through previous practice dilemmas and decisions experienced by practitioners. Phronesis, sometimes referred to as the ‘executive virtue’, offers a way to navigate the practice virtues for any given case to reach a final decision on the way forward. However, very limited empirical data exist to support the theory of phronesis -based medical decision-making, and what does exist tends to focus on individual practitioners rather than practice-based communities of physicians.MethodsThe primary research question was: What does it mean to medical practitioners to make ethically wise decisions for patients and their communities? A three-year ethnographic study explored the practical wisdom of doctors (n=131) and used their narratives to develop theoretical understanding of the concepts of ethical decision-making. Data collection included narrative interviews and observations with hospital doctors and General Practitioners at all stages in career progression. The analysis draws on neo-Aristotelian and MacIntyrean concepts of practice- based virtue ethics and was supported by an arts-based film production process.FindingsWe found that individually doctors conveyed many different practice virtues and those were consolidated into fifteen virtue continua that convey the participants’ collective practical wisdom, including the phronesis virtue. This study advances the existing theory on phronesis as a decision-making approach because only now a theoretical ‘collective practical wisdom’ exists. ConclusionGiven the arguments that doctors feel professionally and personally vulnerable in the context of ethical decision-making, our contribution in the form of a moral debating resource can support before, during and after decision-making reflection. The potential implications are that these theoretical findings can be used by educators and practitioners as a non-prescriptive alternative to improve ethical decision-making, thereby addressing the call in the literature, and benefit patients and their communities, as well.

No abstract

The ethical dilemmas faced every day by military personnel working within the NHS will potentially be very different to ones that will be faced in the wake of a humanitarian disaster. Allied to this the potentially differing objectives from military personnel when compared with other healthcare workers in these scenarios and a conflict of ethics could arise.Within this paper, the fundamentals of this conflict will be explored and how working within the military framework can affect clinical decisions. This is a paper commissioned as a part of the humanitarian and disaster relief operations special issue of BMJ Military Health.