uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Medical Responsibility and Clinical Guidelines: A Few Remarks from Two Italian Juridical Cases
Department of Philosophy, Pontifical Faculty of Theology of Southern Italy S. Thomas, Naples, Italy . (Bioethics)
Italian National Institute of Health. (Bioethics)
2012 (English)In: Medicine Studies, ISSN SSN: 1876-4533 (print version) ISSN: 1876-4541 (electronic version), Vol. 3, no 3, 157-169 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose

The aim of this paper is to assess the complex issue of responsibility in clinical practice. The paper focuses mainly on the relationship between personal- and medical-professional responsibility of practitioners and clinical guidelines.

Methods

After a theoretical review of the different definitions of responsibility in selected bioethical and biojuridical literature, two recent juridical proceedings concerning medical responsibility from Italian Courts are discussed. Subsequently, a theoretical analysis of the definition of clinical practice guidelines is proposed in order to show their feasibility to assess personal- and medical-professional responsibility.

Results

The definitions of responsibility and the two Italian cases show the theoretical and practical difficulties of shared assessments of both personal-professional and medical-professional responsibility in clinical practice. Clinical practice guidelines cannot be assumed as an objective code of action stating exactly a rule of conduct in all situations, but as a tool suggesting how to decide what to do in different conditions.

Conclusions

Responsibility in clinical practice is such a complex issue to deserve a special ethical assessment. The clinician’s personal-professional responsibility cannot be replaced or reduced by clinical practice guidelines, because medicine is as such a relationship focused on the expertize of practitioners. Nonetheless, a shared approach to different clinical conditions is needed in order to avoid a relativist outcome and protect patients’ and even clinicians’ rights. Formal guidelines (that describe not exactly what to do but how to decide what to do) are proposed as potential useful tool to achieve this aim.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, 2012. Vol. 3, no 3, 157-169 p.
Keyword [en]
Ethics; Medicine; Law
National Category
Ethics Medical Ethics
Research subject
Bioethics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-218728DOI: 10.1007/s12376-012-0073-0OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-218728DiVA: diva2:696776
Available from: 2014-02-15 Created: 2014-02-15 Last updated: 2014-02-19Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full texthttp://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12376-012-0073-0

Authority records BETA

Farisco, Michele

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Farisco, Michele
EthicsMedical Ethics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 368 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf