Public and Institutional Aspects of Professional Responsibility in Medicine and Psychiatry

The article develops fresh perspectives on the normative practice model (npm) by extending its application to meso- and macrocontexts. Health care-related interactions, negotiations, and activities in these contexts have their own internal structure. One of the origins of the crisis in medical profe...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Glas, Gerrit 1954- (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: Brill 2017
In: Philosophia reformata
Jahr: 2017, Band: 82, Heft: 2, Seiten: 146-166
RelBib Classification:NCH Medizinische Ethik
VA Philosophie
ZB Soziologie
weitere Schlagwörter:B normative practice model professionalism professional responsibility expert role constitutive norms ethos bureaucracy
Online Zugang: Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang
Volltext (Verlag)
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The article develops fresh perspectives on the normative practice model (npm) by extending its application to meso- and macrocontexts. Health care-related interactions, negotiations, and activities in these contexts have their own internal structure. One of the origins of the crisis in medical professionalism is the disregard for norms that shape health care conditions: efficiency standards, rules for policy making, quality measures, and principles of distributive justice. Disconnecting the professional from the moral purposes of health care was another source of the crisis. Doctors are not engineers; technocratic and scientistic views on professionalism detract from the vocation of the physician, which is to heal, to diminish suffering, and to console. The npm does not offer a blueprint—rather, it serves as a heuristic device that helps professionals and administrators to orient themselves both conceptually and normatively. Differences between contexts lead to different constellations of normative principles and to different descriptions of core responsibilities of stakeholders.
ISSN:2352-8230
Enthält:In: Philosophia reformata
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/23528230-08202005