Physicians have a duty of discretion. When it comes to organ trafficking, or transplantation ethics, you usually hear things like: "Huh, I'm not privy to the facts, sorry!"
I thought the rule for physicians was "Publish or perish!", but as it turned out, you cannot apply this rule to physicians 100 per cent of the time ... Because of their duty of discretion, you see ... At times the rule might change into: "Publish and perish!" ("Publish and you are in serious trouble!")
So, huh, yeah, I guess there is need for ethical mediation. By the way, I happen to be reading "Bad Science", by Ben Goldacre right now. The book says we are constantly bombarded with "inaccurate, contradictory and sometimes even misleading information. Ben Goldacre masterfully dismantles the dodgy science behind some of the great drug trials, court cases and missed opportunities of our time, but he also goes further: out of the bullshit, he shows us the fascinating story of how we know what we know, and gives us the tools to uncover bad science for ourselves."
If it doesn't take a science degree to spot "bad science" yourself - and don't we all have the tools to uncover bad ethics for ourselves: that seat-of-the-pants wisdom? - then why this excessive "duty of discretion"? Thanks to the seat-of-the-pants method, we'll know better ...
==> AUDIO VERSION
==> AUDIO VERSION
Articles
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire