Is there an important moral distinction for medical ethics between lying and other forms of deception?

نویسنده

  • R Gillon
چکیده

In this issue of the journal Ms Jennifer Jackson continues her defence of her thesis that whereas 'we all have a strict duty not to lie, we are not all under a duty of this kind not to deceive intentionally in ways that do not involve lying' (1). In her original paper (2) she argued against the 'common view' that deception that did not involve lying was morally no different from deception that did. If we recognise any duties at all, she claimed, 'we will surely include at least a primafacie duty not to tell lies'. By contrast we do not acknowledge any such prima facie duty against non-lying deception. As evidence of the latter she cited our daily tendency to deceive each other by, for example the wearing of make up, the hiding of baldness, feigned amusement at the feeble witticisms of others and false gratitude for unwelcome presents. The moral duty not to lie was based on the need to maintain trust, she argued, and neither trust nor fellowship within a community are threatened by public toleration of 'the many tricks of deceit we continually practise on one another ...'. Only in cases where the moral obligations of some special relationship exclude it does intentional non-lying deception involve a betrayal of trust and thus become unjust. Responding to her original paper, Dr David Bakhurst argued (3) that lying and non-lying deception were often morally equivalent and that their wrongness resulted from their infringement of patients' autonomy and or their dignity. Respect for patients' rights and dignity were 'deontological constraints' upon action, to be heeded 'regardless of the consequences'; accounts of moral obligations that were based on the consequences of not accepting such obligations were fundamentally flawed. This applied as much to Ms Jackson's own account of the moral obligation not to lie (because lying damages trust and social cohesion) as to the utilitarian account she criticised (that a moral obligation not to lie maximises welfare). For Dr Bakhurst, doctors' obligations neither to lie nor to deceive patients in other ways, stemmed from the moral obligation

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Medicine, lies and deceptions.

This article offers a qualified defence of the view that there is a moral difference between telling lies to one's patients, and deceiving them without lying. However, I take issue with certain arguments offered by Jennifer Jackson in support of the same conclusion. In particular, I challenge her claim that to deny that there is such a moral difference makes sense only within a utilitarian fram...

متن کامل

On lying and deceiving.

This article challenges Jennifer Jackson's recent defence of doctors' rights to deceive patients. Jackson maintains there is a general moral difference between lying and intentional deception: while doctors have a prima facie duty not to lie, there is no such obligation to avoid deception. This paper argues 1) that an examination of cases shows that lying and deception are often morally equival...

متن کامل

Are liars ethical? On the tension between benevolence and honesty

• Deception is sometimes perceived to be ethical. • Prosocial liars are perceived to be more moral than honest individuals. • Benevolence may be more important than honesty for judgments of moral character. • The moral principle of care is sometimes more important than justice. a b s t r a c t a r t i c l e i n f o We demonstrate that some lies are perceived to be more ethical than honest state...

متن کامل

On the morality of deception--does method matter? A reply to David Bakhurst.

Does it signify morally whether a deception is achieved by a lie or some other way? David Bakhurst has challenged my view that it can signify. Here I counter his criticisms--firstly, by clarifying the terminology: What counts as a lie? Secondly, by exploring further what makes lying wrong. Bakhurst maintains that lying is wrong in that it infringes autonomy--and other deceiving stratagems, he s...

متن کامل

Comparative Study of Aquinas and Kant‘s Narration of Ethics and Theology

Since Kant is a son of his time, his thought is originally rooted in the Enlightenment. The distinction between theoretical and practical reason, formal and material conscientiousness, authentic and doctrinal theodicy, sincerity and falsehood, and finally, historical and moral faith religion, are implications of the court held by Kant for metaphysics. Meanwhile, Kantian distinction between deis...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Journal of medical ethics

دوره 19 3  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 1993