• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

John Fletcher

  •  Home
  •  Publications
    49
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  News and Updates
    2

 More details
  • All publications (49)
  • Ethics consultation: A service of clinical ethics
    Newsletter of the Society for Bioethics Consultation. forthcoming.
    Medical EthicsGeneral Issues in Applied EthicsAutonomy in Applied Ethics
  • In memoriam: Dorothy Wertz
    with Knoppers Bartha-Maria and Nippert Irmgard
    Hastings Center Report 33 (4). 2003.
  • The structure and process of ethics consultation services
    with K. L. Moseley
    In Mark P. Aulisio, Robert M. Arnold & Stuart J. Youngner (eds.), Ethics consultation: from theory to practice, Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 96--120. 2003.
    General Issues in Applied EthicsAutonomy in Applied Ethics
  • Standards for evaluation of ethics consultation
    In John C. Fletcher, Norman Quist & Albert R. Jonsen (eds.), Ethics consultation in health care, Health Administration Press. pp. 171--184. 1989.
    Ethics
  •  23
    Moral reasoning among medical geneticists in eighteen nations
    with Dorothy C. Wertz
    Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 10 (2). 1989.
    We surveyed the approaches of 661 geneticists in 18 nations to 14 clinical cases and asked them to give their ethical reasons for choosing these approaches. Patient autonomy was the dominant value in clinical decision-making, with 59% of responses, followed by non-maleficence (20%), beneficence (11%) and justice (5%). In all, 39% described the consequences of their actions, 26% mentioned conflicts of interest between different parties and 72% placed patient welfare above the welfare of others. T…Read more
    We surveyed the approaches of 661 geneticists in 18 nations to 14 clinical cases and asked them to give their ethical reasons for choosing these approaches. Patient autonomy was the dominant value in clinical decision-making, with 59% of responses, followed by non-maleficence (20%), beneficence (11%) and justice (5%). In all, 39% described the consequences of their actions, 26% mentioned conflicts of interest between different parties and 72% placed patient welfare above the welfare of others. The U.S., Canada, Sweden, and U.K. led in responses favoring autonomy. There were substantial international differences in moral reasoning. Gender differences in responses reflected women's greater attention to relationships and supported feminist ethical theories.
    Biomedical EthicsAutonomy in Applied Ethics
  •  19
    Elements of an Ethics Consultation
    with Edward M. Spencer
    Journal of Clinical Ethics 30 (2): 128-130. 2019.
  •  27
    Ethics is Everybody’s Business, Especially in Regard to Confidentiality
    Journal of Clinical Ethics 2 (1): 30-31. 1991.
    Ethics
  •  28
    Ethical Aspect of Research Involving Elderly Subjects
    Journal of Clinical Ethics 1 (4): 285-286. 1990.
    Applied EthicsMedical Ethics
  •  46
    HECs: Are they evaluating their performance? (review)
    with Robin Fretwell Wilson, Martha Neff-Smith, and Donald Phillips
    HEC Forum 5 (1): 1-34. 1993.
    Although the incidence and composition of HECs has been well characterized, little is known about how HECs assess their performance. In order to describe the incidence of HEC self-evaluation, the methods HECs use to evaluate their performance, and the characteristics of HECs that influence self-evaluation, we surveyed the readers ofHospital Ethics. 290 HECs in 45 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and three Canadian provinces, completed questionnaires. Of the 241 HECs included in…Read more
    Although the incidence and composition of HECs has been well characterized, little is known about how HECs assess their performance. In order to describe the incidence of HEC self-evaluation, the methods HECs use to evaluate their performance, and the characteristics of HECs that influence self-evaluation, we surveyed the readers ofHospital Ethics. 290 HECs in 45 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and three Canadian provinces, completed questionnaires. Of the 241 HECs included in the data analysis, 97.9% had performed some self-evaluation. Responding committees largely made formative rather than summative evaluations and appeared to evaluate performance in light of their own objectives rather than basing assessments on specific structural, process, and outcome measures of quality. Responding committees used certain evaluation criteria more extensively than others — among these, the number of participants and staff knowledge of the service provided — with the choice of criteria differing with the function being evaluated. Eight characteristics of HECs influenced the probability of self-evaluation, including age, number of beds and meetings, the existence of a mission statement, and a budget. The presence of certain characteristics made HECs six times more likely to evaluate their performance than HECs without the characteristic
    Biomedical EthicsPublic Health, Misc
  •  46
    Privacy and disclosure in medical genetics examined in an ethics of care
    with Dorothy C. Wertz
    Bioethics 5 (3). 1991.
    GeneticsBiomedical EthicsMedical Ethics
  •  38
    Fatal Knowledge? Prenatal Diagnosis and Sex Selection
    with Dorothy C. Wertz
    Hastings Center Report 19 (3): 21-27. 1989.
    Moral and social arguments weigh heavily against performing medical procedures solely for purposes of sex selection. The medical profession has a responsibility to abandon its posture of ethical neutrality and take a firm stand now against sex selection.
    Biomedical Ethics
  •  30
    Ethics and Genetics: An International Survey
    with Dorothy C. Wertz
    Hastings Center Report 19 (4): 20-24. 1989.
    Biomedical EthicsGenetic Ethics
  •  59
    Brain death and the anencephalic newborn
    with Robert D. Truog
    Bioethics 4 (3). 1990.
    Brain DeathOrgan TransplantationInfanticideOrgan Donation
  •  28
    Incidental Findings in CT Colonography: Literature Review and Survey of Current Research Practice
    with Hassan Siddiki, Beth McFarland, Nora Dajani, Nicholas Orme, Barbara Koenig, Marguerite Strobel, and Susan M. Wolf
    Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 36 (2): 320-331. 2008.
    Incidental fndings of potential medical signifcance are seen in approximately 5-8 percent of asymptomatic subjects and 16 percent of symptomatic subjects participating in large computed tomography colonography studies, with the incidence varying further by CT acquisition technique. While most CTC research programs have a well-defned plan to detect and disclose IFs, such plans are largely communicated only verbally. Written consent documents should also inform subjects of how IFs of potential med…Read more
    Incidental fndings of potential medical signifcance are seen in approximately 5-8 percent of asymptomatic subjects and 16 percent of symptomatic subjects participating in large computed tomography colonography studies, with the incidence varying further by CT acquisition technique. While most CTC research programs have a well-defned plan to detect and disclose IFs, such plans are largely communicated only verbally. Written consent documents should also inform subjects of how IFs of potential medical signifcance will be detected and reported in CTC research studies
    Applied EthicsBiomedical EthicsGenetic Testing
  •  29
    Case Studies in Bioethics: Dialysis for Schizophrenia: Consent & Costs
    with S. Charles Schulz and Daniel P. Van Kammen
    Hastings Center Report 9 (2): 10. 1979.
    Biomedical Ethics
  •  43
    The case for legalized euthanasia
    with Franklin G. Miller
    Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 36 (2): 159-176. 1992.
    Science, Logic, and MathematicsPhilosophy of Medicine
  •  48
    Case Studies: The Price of Silence
    with Abbyann Lynch, Dorothy Wertz, Andrew Czeizel, Francisco M. Salzano, and Kåre Berg
    Hastings Center Report 20 (3): 31. 1990.
    Biomedical Ethics
  •  25
    Geneticists and Sex Selection
    with Celia I. Kaye, John La Puma, and Dorothy C. Wertz
    Hastings Center Report 20 (4): 40. 1990.
    Biomedical Ethics
  •  82
    Ethics Consultation: The Least Dangerous Profession?
    with Giles R. Scofield, Albert R. Jonsen, Christian Lilje, Donnie J. Self, and Judith Wilson Ross
    Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2 (4): 417. 1993.
    Whether ethics is too important to be left to the experts or so important that it must be is an age-old question. The emergence of clinical ethicists raises it again, as a question about professionalism. What role clinical ethicists should play in healthcare decision making – teacher, mediator, or consultant – is a question that has generated considerable debate but no consensus
    Biomedical EthicsPublic Health, Misc
  •  19
    Research Review at NIH
    with Mortimer B. Lipsett and Marian Secundy
    Hastings Center Report 9 (1): 18-21. 1979.
    Biomedical EthicsMedical Ethics
  •  32
    Do Vitamins Prevent Neural Tube Defects (and Can We Find Out Ethically)?
    with Mortimer B. Lipsett
    Hastings Center Report 13 (4): 5-8. 1983.
    Biomedical EthicsReproductive Ethics
  •  18
    Who Should Teach Medical Ethics?
    Hastings Center Report 3 (6): 4-6. 1973.
    Biomedical EthicsMedical Ethics
  •  23
    What Are Society's Interests in Human Genetics and Reproductive Technologies?
    Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 16 (1-2): 131-137. 1988.
    GeneticsTechnology Ethics
  •  27
    The Patient Self‐Determination Act: Yes
    Hastings Center Report 20 (5): 33-35. 1990.
    Biomedical Ethics
  •  12
    Should Health Screening Be Private? Jim Thornton, London, Institute of Economic Affairs, 1999, 65 pages,£ 5 (review)
    Journal of Medical Ethics 26 (3): 220-220. 2000.
    Biomedical Ethics
  •  26
    Medical Genetics
    with Dorothy C. Wertz
    Hastings Center Report 18 (6): 48-48. 1988.
    Biomedical EthicsGenetic Ethics
  •  30
    Germ-line Gene Therapy: A New Stage of Debate
    with W. French Anderson
    Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 20 (1-2): 26-39. 1992.
    GenesBiomedical EthicsHuman Genetic Modification
  •  27
    Federal Regulations for Fetal Research: A Case for Reform
    with Kenneth J. Ryan
    Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 15 (3): 126-138. 1987.
    Biomedical EthicsMedical Ethics
  •  24
    Fetal Research: The State of the Question
    with Joseph D. Schulman
    Hastings Center Report 15 (2): 6-12. 1985.
    Biomedical EthicsReproductive Ethics
  •  88
    Ethical issues in and beyond prospective clinical trials of human Gene therapy
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 10 (3): 293-310. 1985.
    As the potential for the first human trials of somatic cell gene therapy nears, two ethical issues are examined: (1) problems of moral choice for members of institutional review boards who consider the first protocols, for parents, and for the clinical researchers, and the special protections that may be required for the infants and children to be involved, and (2) ethical objections to somatic cell therapy made by those concerned about a putative inevitable progression of genetic knowledge from…Read more
    As the potential for the first human trials of somatic cell gene therapy nears, two ethical issues are examined: (1) problems of moral choice for members of institutional review boards who consider the first protocols, for parents, and for the clinical researchers, and the special protections that may be required for the infants and children to be involved, and (2) ethical objections to somatic cell therapy made by those concerned about a putative inevitable progression of genetic knowledge from therapy to mass genetic engineering in human reproduction. The author's viewpoint is that a consensus exists on the required moral approach to somatic cell therapy, but that no moral approach yet exists for experiments beyond this level, especially in the germline cells of human beings. Keywords: gene therapy, somatic cells, germ cells, institutional review boards, genetic engineering CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?
    Biomedical EthicsGenesHuman Genetic Modification
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback