The conduct of nurse managers, and health service managers more widely, has been subject to scrutiny and critique because of high-profile organisational failures in healthcare. This raises concerns about the practice of nursing management and the use of codes of professional and managerial conduct. Some responses to such failures seem to assume that codes of conduct will ensure or at least increase the likelihood that ethical management will be practised. Codes of conduct are general principles and rules of normative standards, (...) including ethical standards, and guides for action of agents in particular roles. Nurse managers seem to stride two roles. Contra some accounts of the roles of a professional (nurse) and that of a manager, it is claimed that there is no intrinsic incompatibility of the roles though there is always the possibility that it could become so and likewise for codes of conduct. Codes of conduct can be used to support nurse managers in making practical decisions via an ‘outside in’ approach with an emphasis on the use of principles and an ‘inside out’ approach with an emphasis on the agent’s character. It is claimed that both approaches are necessary, especially as guides to ethical action. However, neither is sufficient for action because judgement and choice will always be required (principles always underdetermine action) as will a conducive environment that positively influences good judgement by being supportive of the basic principles and values of healthcare institutions. The response to the Covid-19 pandemic has created a unique set of circumstances in which the practical judgement, including ethical judgement, of nurse managers at all levels is being tested. However, the pandemic could be a turning point because staff and institutions (temporarily) freed from managerialism have demonstrated excellent practice supportive of ethical and other practical decision making. Organisations need to learn from this post pandemic. (shrink)

Social, political, and economic environments play an active role in nurturing professional virtue. Yet, these environments can also lead to the erosion of virtue. As such, professional virtue is fragile and vulnerable to environmental shifts. While physicians are often considered to be among the most virtuous of professional groups, concern has also always existed about the impact of commercial arrangements on physicians’ willingness and capacity to enact their professional virtues. This article examines the ways in which commercial arrangements have been (...) negotiated to secure medical virtue from real or perceived threats of erosion. In particular, we focus on the concern surrounding conflicts of interest arising from commercial arrangements that have developed as a result of neoliberal economic and social policies. The deregulation of medical markets and privatization of services have produced new commercial relationships that are often misunderstood by patients, publics, and physicians themselves. ‘Conflicts of interest’ policies have been introduced in an attempt to safeguard ethical conduct and medical practice. However, a number of virtue ethicists have critiqued these policies as inadequate for securing virtue. We examine the ways in which commercial arrangements have been seen to impact upon medical virtue, both historically and in the context of modern medicine. We then describe and critique current efforts to restore clinical virtue through both conflict of interest policies and through virtue ethics. Finally, we suggest some possible ways of addressing the corrosive effects of neoliberalism on medical virtue. (shrink)