A comparison of approaches to virtue for nursing ethics

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 Q4 ETHICS
Matthew Ferkaney, Roger Newham
{"title":"A comparison of approaches to virtue for nursing ethics","authors":"Matthew Ferkaney, Roger Newham","doi":"10.2143/EP.26.3.3287341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As in many other fields of practical ethics, virtue ethics is increasingly of interest within nursing ethics. Nevertheless, the virtue ethics literature in nursing ethics remains relatively small and underdeveloped. This article aims to categorize which broad theoretical approaches to virtue have been taken, to undertake some initial comparative assessment of their relative merits given the peculiar ethical dilemmas facing nurse practitioners, and to highlight the problem areas for virtue ethics in the nursing context. We find the most common approaches fall into care approaches grounded in sentimentalist or feminist ethics, eudaimonist approaches grounded in neo-Aristotelianism, and those grounded in MacIntyre’s practice theory. Our initial assessment is that the eudaimonist approach fares best in terms of merit and relative to criticisms of virtue ethics. But an outstanding issue concerns the motivational psychology of virtuous nursing and whether virtue ethical accounts of right action are self-effacing, i.e. justify an act on grounds that cannot function as the agent’s reason for doing it if she is to act well. One of us, Newham, believes that a virtue consequentialist approach is the best response to these issues. Some form of pluralistic theory, such as Christine Swanton’s, may be needed to explain the many competing values and goods involved in ethical nursing.","PeriodicalId":54109,"journal":{"name":"Ethical Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethical Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2143/EP.26.3.3287341","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

As in many other fields of practical ethics, virtue ethics is increasingly of interest within nursing ethics. Nevertheless, the virtue ethics literature in nursing ethics remains relatively small and underdeveloped. This article aims to categorize which broad theoretical approaches to virtue have been taken, to undertake some initial comparative assessment of their relative merits given the peculiar ethical dilemmas facing nurse practitioners, and to highlight the problem areas for virtue ethics in the nursing context. We find the most common approaches fall into care approaches grounded in sentimentalist or feminist ethics, eudaimonist approaches grounded in neo-Aristotelianism, and those grounded in MacIntyre’s practice theory. Our initial assessment is that the eudaimonist approach fares best in terms of merit and relative to criticisms of virtue ethics. But an outstanding issue concerns the motivational psychology of virtuous nursing and whether virtue ethical accounts of right action are self-effacing, i.e. justify an act on grounds that cannot function as the agent’s reason for doing it if she is to act well. One of us, Newham, believes that a virtue consequentialist approach is the best response to these issues. Some form of pluralistic theory, such as Christine Swanton’s, may be needed to explain the many competing values and goods involved in ethical nursing.
护理伦理德性途径的比较
正如在实践伦理学的许多其他领域一样,美德伦理学在护理伦理学中越来越受到关注。然而,关于护理伦理学的德性伦理学文献相对较少且不发达。本文旨在对已经采取的广泛的理论方法进行分类,针对护士从业人员面临的特殊伦理困境,对它们的相对优点进行一些初步的比较评估,并突出护理背景下美德伦理的问题领域。我们发现,最常见的方法是基于感伤主义或女权主义伦理学的关怀方法,基于新亚里士多德主义的幸福主义方法,以及基于麦金太尔实践理论的方法。我们最初的评估是,就优点和对美德伦理的批评而言,理想主义的方法效果最好。但是,一个突出的问题涉及到美德护理的动机心理学,以及美德伦理对正确行为的描述是否具有自我谦抑性,也就是说,如果行为主体想要表现良好,就不能以这种理由为行为辩护。我们中的一个人,纽汉,认为美德结果主义方法是对这些问题的最佳回应。可能需要某种形式的多元理论,如克里斯汀·斯旺顿的理论,来解释伦理护理中涉及的许多相互竞争的价值观和商品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信