Charlotte, North Carolina, United States of America
Areas of Specialization
Applied Ethics
Areas of Interest
Applied Ethics
  •  95
    Patient Advocacy in Clinical Ethics Consultation
    American Journal of Bioethics 12 (8). 2012.
    The question of whether clinical ethics consultants may engage in patient advocacy in the course of consultation has not been addressed, but it highlights for the field that consultants? allegiances, and the boundaries of appropriate professional practice, must be better understood. I consider arguments for and against patient advocacy in clinical ethics consultation, which demonstrate that patient advocacy is permissible, but not central to the practice of consultation. I then offer four recomm…Read more
  •  72
    Introduction
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (4). 2003.
    This Article does not have an abstract
  •  60
    Introduction
    with Ana Smith Iltis
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (6). 2002.
    This Article does not have an abstract
  •  59
    Patient ethics and responsibilities
    with Ana Smith Iltis
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (2). 2005.
    This Article does not have an abstract
  •  46
  •  31
    An Ethics Expertise for Clinical Ethics Consultation
    Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 39 (4): 649-661. 2011.
    The legitimacy of clinical ethics consultation is often implied to rest on the legitimacy of moral expertise. In turn, moral expertise seems subject to many serious critiques, the success of which implies that clinical ethics consultation is illegitimate. I explore a number of these critiques, and forward “ethics expertise,” as distinct from “moral expertise,” as a way of avoiding these critiques. I argue that “ethics expertise” succeeds in avoiding most of the critiques, captures what clinical …Read more
  •  26
    Morality, religion and metaphysics: Diverse visions in bioethics
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (4). 2000.
    This Article does not have an abstract
  •  21
    The Case of Vipul Bhrigu and the Federal Definition of Research Misconduct
    Science and Engineering Ethics 20 (2): 411-421. 2014.
    The Office of Research Integrity found in 2011 that Vipul Bhrigu, a postdoctoral researcher who sabotaged a colleague’s research materials, was guilty of misconduct. However, I argue that this judgment is ill-considered and sets a problematic precedent for future cases. I first discuss the current federal definition of research misconduct and representative cases of research misconduct. Then, because this case recalls a debate from the 1990s over what the definition of “research misconduct” ough…Read more
  •  18
    Bioethics and Moral Content: National Traditions of Health Care Morality: Papers Dedicated in Tribute to Kazumasa Hoshino (edited book)
    with Kazumasa Hoshino and H. Tristram Engelhardt
    Kluwer Academic Publishers. 2002.
    Is there only one bioethics? Is a global bioethics possible? Or, instead, does one encounter a plurality of bioethical approaches shaped by local cultural and national traditions? Some thirty years ago a field of applied ethics emerged under the rubric `bioethics'. Little thought was given at the time to the possibility that this field bore the imprint of a particular American set of moral commitments. This volume explores the plurality of moral perspectives shaping bioethics. It is inspired by …Read more
  •  16
    Clinical Ethics Consultants are not “Ethics” Experts—But They do Have Expertise
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 41 (4): 384-400. 2016.
    The attempt to critique the profession of clinical ethics consultation by establishing the impossibility of ethics expertise has been a red herring. Decisions made in clinical ethics cases are almost never based purely on moral judgments. Instead, they are all-things-considered judgments that involve determining how to balance other values as well. A standard of justified decision-making in this context would enable us to identify experts who could achieve these standards more often than others,…Read more
  •  15
    The “Ethics” Expertise in Clinical Ethics Consultation
    with Ana S. Iltis
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 41 (4): 363-368. 2016.
    The nature, possibility, and implications of ethics expertise in general and of bioethics expertise in particular has been the focus of extensive debate for over thirty years. What is ethics expertise and what does it enable experts to do? Knowing what ethics expertise is can help answer another important question: What, if anything, makes a claim of expertise legitimate? In other words, how does someone earn the appellation “ethics expert?” There remains deep disagreement on whether ethics expe…Read more
  •  13
    An Ethics Expertise for Clinical Ethics Consultation
    Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 39 (4): 649-661. 2011.
  •  12
    The ethics of being a patient
    with Ana Smith Iltis
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (6): 711. 2002.
    This Article does not have an abstract
  •  11
    The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 12, Issue 8, Page W1-W3, August 2012
  •  10
    Problems with Minimal-Risk Research Oversight: A Threat to Academic Freedom?
    IRB: Ethics & Human Research 31 (3): 11. 2009.
    A subcommittee of the American Association of University Professors has published a report, “Research on Human Subjects: Academic Freedom and the Institutional Review Board” , which argues that institutional review board oversight may pose a threat to academic freedom, and that a different oversight model based on departmental review would both maintain subject protection and eliminate the threat. But the report does not demonstrate that IRBs pose a threat to academic freedom, and using departme…Read more
  •  10
    On Internal Accountability in Clinical Ethics Consultation
    American Journal of Bioethics 14 (6): 43-45. 2014.
    No abstract
  •  10
    Clinical ethics consultation's dilemma, and a solution
    Journal of Clinical Ethics 22 (4): 380. 2011.
    Clinical ethics consultation is on the horns of a dilemma. One horn skewers the field for its lack of standards, while the other horn skewers it for proposing arbitrary or deeply contested foundations. I articulate the dilemma by discussing several critiques of the field and the challenge of formulating standards and suggest that the solution lies, at least until a robust consensus emerges, with establishing a list of proscriptive standards to guide the field.
  •  9
    Call for papers
    with Ana Smith Iltis
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (1): 127. 2003.
  •  7
    The ethics of being a patient
    with Ana Smith Iltis
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (3): 391. 2003.
    This Article does not have an abstract
  •  6
    When Citizens Do Science: Stories from Labs, Garages, and Beyond
    Narrative Inquiry in Bioethics 9 (1): 1-4. 2019.
  •  6
    Beyond Belmont—and Beyond Regulations
    American Journal of Bioethics 19 (8): 19-21. 2019.
    Volume 19, Issue 8, August 2019, Page 19-21.
  •  5
    Call for Papers
    with Ana Smith Iltis
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (2): 255-255. 2003.