Switch to: References

Citations of:

Mapping the Moral Terrain of Clinical Deception

Abram Brummett & Erica K. Salter

Hastings Center Report 53 (1):17-25 (2023)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

Exploring Partial Disclosure in Research: Challenges, Justifications, and Recommendations for Ethical Oversight.Ifeanyichukwu Akuma & Vina Vaswani - forthcoming - Asian Bioethics Review:1-21.details Deception in research is contentious, as ethical codes stress informed consent, yet complete disclosure may jeopardise validity. Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) guidelines classify deception into active, incomplete, and authorised forms. This study explores the ethical justification for incomplete (partial disclosure), permissible instances, and the dilemma faced by ethics committees in balancing scientific rigour and participant protection. The qualitative, non-experimental cross-sectional research, using in-depth interviews, identifies themes through thematic analysis. Findings reveal challenges for ethics committees, as incomplete information hampers (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
Justifying Clinical Deception: Some Amendments to Brummett and Salter.Christopher Meyers - 2023 - Hastings Center Report 53 (1):26-27.details In Abram Brummett and Erica K. Salter's excellent paper, “Mapping the Moral Terrain of Clinical Deception,” they rightly note that it is sometimes ethically appropriate for health care professionals to deceive patients and families. However, they also note that because doing so violates a prima facie duty of honesty, the ethical burden of proof falls upon the deceiver. Hence, they also provide a sophisticated framework for determining whether any given case is warranted. I applaud their overall approach but also critique (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
The Problem of Clinical Deception and Why We Cannot Begin in the Middle.Stewart Clem - 2023 - Hastings Center Report 53 (1):28-29.details In this brief commentary, I offer an appreciative yet critical analysis of Abram Brummett and Erica Salter's article, “Mapping the Moral Terrain of Clinical Deception.” I challenge the authors to clarify their choice of the term “deception” (as opposed to “lying” or “dishonesty”), and I explain how these different terms may affect one's moral analysis. I also draw attention to the authors’ claim that veracity is the ethical default of clinicians. I argue that their failure to defend this claim renders (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
Deception, Pain, and Placebo: Applying the Brummett‐Salter Deception Framework.Jason Adam Wasserman - 2023 - Hastings Center Report 53 (1):30-32.details In this commentary, I explore the usefulness of the framework Abram Brummett and Erica K. Salter present in their article “Mapping the Moral Terrain of Clinical Deception.” Deception cases are divisive because they nearly always evoke the metadilemma of clinical ethics: a clash between duties (in these cases, truth telling) and consequences (whatever good might come of the lie). Here, I describe a patient case in which the clinical team considered deceiving a patient about his pain‐medicine dosage in exchange for (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
An “ethics of strangers”? On knowing the patient in clinical ethics.Joar Björk & Anna Hirsch - 2024 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 27 (3):389-397.details The shape and function of ethical imperatives may vary if the context is an interaction between strangers, or those who are well acquainted. This idea, taken up from Stephen Toulmin’s distinction between an “ethics of strangers” and an “ethics of intimacy”, can be applied to encounters in healthcare. There are situations where healthcare personnel (HCP) know their patients (corresponding to an “ethics of intimacy”) and situations where HCP do not know their patients (corresponding to “an ethics of strangers”). Does it (...) Download Export citation Bookmark

1