How to evaluate the quality of an ethical deliberation? A pragmatist proposal for evaluation criteria and collaborative research

Senghor, Abdou Simon; Racine, Éric

doi:10.1007/s11019-022-10091-2

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, they hold, the quality of the 32 reflective dialogue should be evaluated by both bioethicists and practitioners. 38 Similarly, in taking a participatory approach to TB, a balance needs to be found between real-world needs and experiences of practitioners and ideals and expertise of academic ethicists. Establishing what constitutes 'good ethical reflection' in a certain context therefore is, to some extent, comparable to shared decision-making as a collaborative process between patients and physicians: where ethicists may weigh in with their expertise on moral reasoning and standards for quality, practitioners bring in their preferences, values, needs and limitations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translational bioethics as a two‐way street. Developing clinical ethics support instruments with and for healthcare practitioners

Metselaar

2023

Bioethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses an approach to translational bioethics (TB) that is concerned with the adaptation—or ‘translation’—of concepts, theories and methods from bioethics to practical contexts, in order to support ‘non‐bioethicists’, such as researchers and healthcare practitioners, in dealing with their ethical issues themselves. Specifically, it goes into the participatory development of clinical ethics support (CES) instruments that respond to the needs and wishes of healthcare practitioners and that are tailored to the specific care contexts in which they are to be used. The theoretical underpinnings of this participatory approach to TB are found in hermeneutic ethics and pragmatism. As an example, the development of CURA, a low‐threshold CES instrument for healthcare professionals in palliative care, is discussed. From this example, it becomes clear that TB is a two‐way street. Practice may be improved by means of CES that is effectively tailored to specific end users and care contexts. The other way around, ethical theory may be enriched by means of the insights gained from engaging with practice in developing CES in a process of co‐creation. TB is also a two‐way street in the sense that it requires collaboration and commitment of both bioethicists and practitioners, who engage in a process of mutual learning. However, substantial challenges remain. For instance, is there a limit to the extent to which a method of moral reasoning can be adapted in order to meet the constraints of a given healthcare setting? Who is to decide, the bioethicist or the practitioners?

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translational bioethics as a two‐way street. Developing clinical ethics support instruments with and for healthcare practitioners

Metselaar

2023

Bioethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Accordingly, it can be argued that what makes bioethics a discipline is not well-established methodological rules, but criteria for the systematic evaluation of the quality of ethical deliberations. 42 The question "What is good bioethics?" has been extensively discussed.…”

Section: Quality Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioethics: No Method—No Discipline?

Hofmann

2024

Camb Q Healthc Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article raises the question of whether bioethics qualifies as a discipline. According to a standard definition of discipline as “a field of study following specific and well-established methodological rules” bioethics is not a specific discipline as there are no explicit “well-established methodological rules.” The article investigates whether the methodological rules can be implicit, and whether bioethics can follow specific methodological rules within subdisciplines or for specific tasks. As this does not appear to be the case, the article examines whether bioethics’ adherence to specific quality criteria (instead of methodological rules) or pursuing of a common goal can make it qualify as a discipline. Unfortunately, the result is negative. Then, the article scrutinizes whether referring to bioethics institutions and professional qualifications can ascertain bioethics as a discipline. However, this makes the definition of bioethics circular. The article ends by admitting that bioethics can qualify as a discipline according to broader definitions of discipline, for example, as an “area of knowledge, research and education.” However, this would reduce bioethics’ potential for demarcation and identity-building. Thus, to consolidate the discipline of bioethics and increase its impact, we should explicate and elaborate on its methodology.

show abstract

“…In other words, the ultimate criterion for assessing what is "good" and "bad" considers the entire situation, the actors and actions involved, and their short-term and long-term consequences. Morality does not reside in prejudgment but precisely in the acts of choosing, deliberating, and doubting (Senghor & Racine, 2022). In a broader sense, such actions are based on expectation and, thus, by definition, on uncertainty.…”

Section: Pragmatism and Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pragmatism and Methodology

Gillespie,

Glăveanu,

de Saint Laurent

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taking a pragmatist approach to methods and methodology that fosters meaningful, impactful, and ethical research, this book rises to the challenge of today's data revolution. It shows how pragmatism can turn challenges, such as the abundance and accumulation of big qualitative data, into opportunities. The authors summarize the pragmatist approach to different aspects of research, from epistemology, theory, and questions to ethics, as well as data collection and analysis. The chapters outline and document a new type of mixed methods design called 'multi-resolution research,” which serves to overcome old divides between quantitative and qualitative methods. It is the ideal resource for students and researchers within the social and behavioural sciences seeking new ways to analyze large sets of qualitative data. This book is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

show abstract

How to evaluate the quality of an ethical deliberation? A pragmatist proposal for evaluation criteria and collaborative research

Cited by 11 publications

References 56 publications

Translational bioethics as a two‐way street. Developing clinical ethics support instruments with and for healthcare practitioners

Translational bioethics as a two‐way street. Developing clinical ethics support instruments with and for healthcare practitioners

Bioethics: No Method—No Discipline?

Pragmatism and Methodology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About