Medical Ethics and Professional Monopoly

Author:

Berlant Jeffrey L.1

Affiliation:

1. University of California

Abstract

The study of medical ethics should properly include codes of ethics issued by Enlightenment philos ophers and modern medical associations. Official codes of ethics adopted by the medical profession in England and the United States have exhibited monopolistic tendencies which have strengthened over time. Examination of Thomas Percival's 1803 code of ethics reveals monopolistic rules in the areas of trust inducement, consultations, criticism, and fee setting. Another ethical code, written by John Gregory in 1770, provides evidence of antimonopolistic ethical atti tudes during the Enlightenment which were not subse quently adopted by official professional bodies. The series of ethical codes issued by the American Medical Association since its inception in 1847 exhibits even more monopolistic rules than had Percivalean ethics. In contrast to the mono polistic tendencies of official medical ethics, however, trends are currently emerging toward nonmonopolistic counter- ethics in the areas of restraint of competition, patient decision making, professional review mechanisms, and rational health care services planning.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3