We invite submissions that are rich in new information to fill the gap in knowledge in applied ethics. We also encourage more explicit normative discussions of the relevance of new knowledge to persisting ethical issues and questions that threaten social justice and equity. It is important that we address threats to the professional integrity of practitioners we engage both in traditional and as well as emerging practices and technologies.
Communication between healthcare professionals and patients typically concerns diagnoses, treatment options, and prognoses. In certain situations, however, not all relevant information is disclosed in order to prevent harm or to protect patient well-being. This practice is commonly referred to as therapeutic privilege. While therapeutic privilege has been widely discussed in relation to autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence, its implications for justice remain insufficiently explored. This article addresses this gap by examining therapeutic privilege through the lens of epistemic injustice. It argues that the selective withholding of information may undermine patients’ status as epistemic agents and thereby give rise to both hermeneutical and testimonial forms of injustice. The analysis focuses on three contexts in which such injustices arise: (1) the relationship between healthcare professionals and patients, (2) age-based differences in treatment, and (3) the role of family caregivers. Across these cases, the analysis argues that practices of information control can lead to forms of exclusion and unequal recognition. The article concludes that prevailing justifications of therapeutic privilege remain incomplete as long as they neglect considerations of epistemic injustice. The article therefore calls for greater attention to the conditions under which patients are recognized as epistemic participants within healthcare communication. Keywords: Therapeutic privilege; epistemic injustice; family caregivers; doctor-patient relationship; ageism
Book review of Ho, A. (2023). Live like nobody is watching: Relational autonomy in the age of artificial intelligence health monitoring. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780197556269.001.0001
How can peace negotiations be conducted in a way that is ethically viable, producing results that all parties to the negotiations will abide by and respect? This article discusses the importance of fairness in general and perceived fairness in particular as key parts of ethical and successful peace negotiations. Given the increase in protracted and brutal conflicts at the current moment in history, addressing key ethical aspects of peace negotiations is essential. Keywords: negotiations, peace, fairness, perceptions, recognition
Shortage of organs for transplantation leads to reduced quality of life and premature deaths among patients on waiting lists. One proposed policy response is the conscription of cadaveric organs, whereby all suitable organs are retrieved after death. Another proposal is to restrict access to transplantation for patients who have not themselves consented to donate. The ethical acceptability of both policies remains contested, and empirical evidence on public opinion is limited. Previous surveys suggest low support for conscription. We conducted a national survey of adults in Norway (N = 1000) to investigate public attitudes towards the badness of death (reported elsewhere), the conscription of organs for transplantation, and reciprocity, understood as the acceptance to be a potential donor as necessary for being a potential recipient of organs if in need. This last question did not elicit conclusive responses. It did, however, show a correlation between responses supportive of reciprocity (i.e., against free riding) and those supportive of conscription. The results suggest a slight majority in favor of conscription in Norway. Our survey shows that belief in an afterlife corresponds negatively with acceptance of conscription, but no other demographic data are influential. Keywords: Conscription of organs; Free riding; Public opinion; Reciprocity; Solidarity.
