Suchergebnisse

This Element offers a broad perspective on responsibility for health. This includes responsibilities in the prevention of disease and accidents, and in the creation of healthcare for all. The professional responsibilities of physicians and nurses are explored, and so are the responsibilities that we all have for our own health. Many of the central problems in healthcare ethics are discussed from a responsibility perspective, for instance paternalism, informed consent, evidence-based medicine, alternative medicine, and the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare. In order to perform this analysis, conceptual tools for responsibility analysis are provided, such as the distinction between blame responsibility and task responsibility and various notions of causality that are relevant for our understanding of responsibility.

In public discussion, high-level nuclear waste is often referred to as an exceptional environmental problem. It is indeed an exceptional problem, but not primarily because of the permanent threat that nuclear waste poses to future generations, as is usually argued. Its exceptionality rather stems from socio-technical factors that create deadlocks and dilemmas, thus hampering and delaying decision-making. This article provides an overview of major socio-technical issues pertaining to nuclear waste, including some that have been neglected in previous literature, and thus contributes to technology assessment in this field.

AbstractMoral philosophy is a rich tradition that contains many alternative approaches to determining what is right and wrong. A limited account that only considers (hedonistic) utilitarianism and deontology cannot do justice to moral philosophy. It is necessary to also consider the many other general‐purpose moral theories that have been proposed, as well as the approaches developed in various branches of applied ethics, such as healthcare ethics, the ethics of technology, and the ethics of risk.

AbstractEthical analysis is often needed in the preparation of policy decisions on risk. A three‐step method is proposed for performing an ethical risk analysis (eRA). In the first step, the people concerned are identified and categorized in terms of the distinct but compatible roles of being risk‐exposed, a beneficiary, or a decisionmaker. In the second step, a more detailed classification of roles and role combinations is performed, and ethically problematic role combinations are identified. In the third step, further ethical deliberation takes place, with an emphasis on individual risk‐benefit weighing, distributional analysis, rights analysis, and power analysis. Ethical issues pertaining to subsidiary risk roles, such as those of experts and journalists, are also treated in this phase. An eRA should supplement, not replace, a traditional risk analysis that puts emphasis on the probabilities and severities of undesirable events but does not cover ethical issues such as agency, interpersonal relationships, and justice.