The Cruzan case portrayed ethics as high drama, an intense public struggle over the central issue of when it is right to withdraw nutrition support. There are, however, other, quieter ethical struggles that confront nutrition support teams daily and reach to the very core of each individual's integrity and character. These recurring dilemmas are no less powerful in their impact upon patient care and caregivers and no less potentially destructive to relationships and self-esteem. This is ethics in ordinary time.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Gilligan C.In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982.
2.
President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research.Making health care decisions. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982.
3.
Bok S.Lying. New York: Random House, 1978.
4.
Capron A.Keynote address: "Access to health care-rationing resources." Denver: The Center for Applied Biomedical Ethics, 1986.
5.
Moody H. "Fiduciary paternalism-autonomy in long term care." Conference on Ethical Issues in Health Care for the Elderly. Memphis: University of Tennessee, 1986.
6.
Pellegrino ED , Thomasma DCFor the patient's good. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.
7.
Blum LAGilligan and Kohlberg: implications for moral theory. Ethics1988;98:472-91.
8.
Flanagan O., Jackson K.Justice, care, and gender: the Kohlberg-Gilligan debate revisited. Ethics1987;97:622-37.
