Medical Ethics: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #114

by Tony Hope

Medical ethics is an area that has particular interest for the general public as well as for the medical practitioner, and issues concerning medical ethics seem to be constantly in the headlines. This short and accessible introduction provides an invaluable tool with which to think about the
ethical values that lie at the heart of medicine.

Tony Hope deals with thorny moral issues, including euthanasia and the morality of killing. He also explores political questions, such as how we can make sure health care resources are distributed fairly. Each chapter in the book considers a different issue, for example, genetics, modern
reproductive technologies, resource allocation, mental health, and medical research. Each section also discusses controversial questions such Who should have access to reproductive technology? Is it right to fund expensive drug treatment for individuals? Should treatment for mental illness be
imposed on patients without their consent? Considering a wide range of questions of medical ethics, this Very Short Introduction will help to explain some of the confusing issues facing the field of medicine today.

About the Combining authority with wit, accessibility, and style, Very Short Introductions offer an introduction to some of life's most interesting topics. Written by experts for the newcomer, they demonstrate the finest contemporary thinking about the central problems and issues in hundreds
of key topics, from philosophy to Freud, quantum theory to Islam.

Genres: Medicine, Philosophy, Nonfiction, Science, Medical, Education, Reference

168 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

Reviews

[Petra X · Rating 5 out of 5]

From an existential point of view, everyone should read this short book. We will all face quite a few of these situations in our lives or those of our friends or family. Before making the decisions that the doctors will inevitably ask us to make, although they are the ones with all the knowledge and we are the ones likely caught up in a turmoil of emotion, we should know all the factors involved. Or at least all the questions we should be considering answering before we make decisions whether they be of life or death or a possible course of treatment.
_____

Notes on reading the book A really good read. The author's absolute simplicity in explaining medical decisions that looking simple on the surface but are in fact very complex, and then suggesting the questions, logical but philosophical too, makes this book an interesting, informative and mind-opening book. It has a feminist and existentialist slant which makes it in tune with how people think these days, as opposed to academics or health care tribunals.

[Salman Tariq · Rating 4 out of 5]

Only for medical Students , doctors or researchers

This book debates dilemmas of modern medical world, like euthanasia, IVF, Medical research in devolving countries , homosexuality , hermaphrodites and genetics.

writer has not presented the case of getting maximum funds like military complexes. Its strange how much money is fulled in wars, how system keep people hand to mouth for health. Beside this issue, it is well researched book for a particular socio-cultural background.

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is super interesting, and I like the use of the ethical scenarios to explain a point, I just wish it went a little bit more in depth

[Twisted.Plots · Rating 3 out of 5]

Spoiler Alert: A very short introduction indeed.

[Marco · Rating 4 out of 5]

Medical Ethics: A Very Short Introduction by Tony Hope is an impressive book. Despite fitting into my coat pocket and having only 128 pages, Medical Ethics discusses and covers a huge range of medical topics both moral and political.

Medical ethics is a subject that is interesting but decent resources for people like me who want to do Medicine at university are scarce. What I love most about medical ethics is that there is hardly ever a clear cut answer and it is a constantly developing field. Many people have in their minds that medical ethics is just debates about whether euthanasia or abortion is immoral or not, but personally, just as Tony Hope says in this book's first chapter, I believe that "medical ethics is exciting!"

The best thing about this book is that when it discusses controversial questions such as...

- Who should have access to reproductive technology? Who should pay?
- Is it right to fund expensive drug treatment for individuals?
- Should active euthanasia be legalized?
- Should treatment for mental illness be imposed on patients without their consent?
- Who should have access to information from genetic testing?
- Should we require consent for the use of dead bodies or organs in medical research?

Hope goes through each topic by using what he calls the tools in the tool-box for reasoning: logic, conceptual analysis, consistency and case comparison, thought experiment, and reasoning from principles. One of the chapters in this book specifically looks at how to use these tools and also looks at critically analysing fallacies in reasoning, which I used to base my blogpost on Tony Nicklinson's case.

Each chapter takes on a different moral dilemma and the way the book is written makes it very accessible by busting legal and medical jargon and setting the scene for each chapter. I wholeheartedly recommend this book to anyone who wants to do Medicine as it helps to develop critical thinking skills and ethical reasoning and of course, give an introduction, a gateway into the world of medical ethics.

Ultimately, this book does what it says on the tin and it gives a very short introduction. (Hence why at the end of the book, there are some more further reading recommendation!) Unfortunately, it does not cover every ethical situation in medicine but the framework and structure that it provides when tackling an ethical question is what this book endows on the reader.

[lukas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dobrá knižka, len príliš short a take viac rámcové bolo, odporúčam

[Duc Hoang · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is what the title says it is, a very short introduction to medical ethics. It's short, indeed, but it's not an easy read (to those whose mother tongue is not English like me, at least). It won't introduce the whole system of medical ethics structurally or any theories related to it in details, but rather pose interesting cases in which medical ethics is challenged and questions are raised, like the case of voluntary euthenasia, is it just for a physician to help a patient die as the patient wishes to? Or the case of genetic information, consider a couple who comes to you, a geneticist, to consult about their child, you find out that the child doesn't belong to the father, will you tell him at the breaching of the mother's confidentiality? Whose are those information anyway?... Yes, there are answers given, too, but it won't end there. You may find the answers somewhat unsatisfactory (well, at least, I did). Then you can look up the reference at the end of the book to find your own answers. That, I think, is the success of an introduction, it shows you the gates to choose, the roads to take and the places to expore. Kudos to the author, Tony Hope, for having done such a good work.

[Hannah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really interesting, but a lot to get your head around.

[Josh Friedlander · Rating 3 out of 5]

Does what it says in the tin? Medical ethics is obviously a fascinating and live topic, but doesn't contain much theoretical content, being just an application of theoretical ethics. Thus the author of this work does not explain the different schools of ethics but instead jumps into case studies, in each chapter giving his decision on a controversial topic and defending it from possible attacks. (Unsurprisingly for someone based at Oxford's Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, he generally takes a utilitarian view.) It makes for an entertaining read even as I believe that a neutral presentation of the debate would serve as a better introduction. The book ends by citing the arguments of the judges in the Gillick case, where a British woman sued to prevent government doctors from prescribing contraceptives to a girl under sixteen without informing her parents, as a good example of how informed, thoughtful debate about medical ethics appears. We might speculate about how the author might feel about emergency vaccines being rolled out by the Chinese and Russian governments without adequate testing: perhaps the potential mass benefit weighed against the (probably not enormous) risk of major adverse effects would justify endangering the vaccine's early subjects.

[Natalie M · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent introduction to Medical Ethics. I highly recommend it, it will hurt your brain to try and decide what is right and what is wrong and will pathe the way for further reading. I will definitely be reading it again. If anyone has any recommendations on other books on medical ethics please let me know.

[Eitakbackwards · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.6

Basically identified this as the most efficient book to read on this topic @timeofneed. It covered the 4 ethical principles (autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice) but more implicitly so felt like you needed to know about those underlying the discussions. At first the way it's structured didn't really suit me, it was more taking an example and sewing in the arguments through that rather than discussing arguments with examples to illustrate. But after a little bit go into it.

Was some interesting info. For example, had never considered the discrimination against people with mental health issues whereby, psychiatry is the only specialism in which you can enforce treatment against someone's own will. The book compares psychiatric patients and prisoners:

Psychiatric patients can be preemptively sectioned if they are deemed a threat to themselves/others, they can also be held for longer than planned if it is believed they might be a threat in either sense following discharge, 'believed' being the operative word, this stuff is subjective judgement. However, it is a human right that ppl (even people who are believed to be violent) can't be preemptively imprisoned until they have committed a crime and once a sentence has been served, a convict must be released, even if there is a possibility that they will reoffend. There isn't consistency here and found that really interesting. @CUps, would be into your LEGAL opinions and THOUGHTS of this.....

Obviously, you have to be practical and protect society but also you have to be consistent. What is the difference between someone who is mentally stable and violent and someone who is mentally unstable and thus may become violent in a x% of cases?....

[Ada · Rating 4 out of 5]

A nice little introduction to a very interesting field. With a wide array of relevant real life examples, this book challenged (if not necessarily changed) how I think of involuntary commitment of the severely mentally ill.

The book even contains a crash course in logical reasoning and argumentation for the uninitiated.

[Gilgamesha · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is a must read for everyone....rarely I have come across a book with 120 pages packed with this much crucial information

[Christina · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5
Really interesting in some chapters, and had a lot of fun going slowly with this one. Very thought provoking and definitely some topics I'd want to bring up with others to discuss!

[Izzy · Rating 4 out of 5]

does what it says on the tin

[Zac Dragan · Rating 4 out of 5]

“the unexamined life is not worth living” damn socrates

[Farnz · Rating 4 out of 5]

QOTD: Are you a hedgehog or a fox? Let me know down below! The🦔 knows 1 universal, organized system (Dante, Plato, …) while the🦊 knows many experiences & is more centrifugal than centripetal (Shakespeare, Aristotle…). I think I’m a🦊

Written by a medical doctor (psychiatrist) & professor of ethics at Oxford uni, this 154 page book is a quick intro into the world of medical ethics. I’m studying dentistry & have always been interested in med & healthcare, so it was natural for me to read this. I got it for a great price at @keatsandchapman . Ethics is such a complicated field, there’s so many twists & turns, a mix of philosophy & science. This covers the excitement of medical ethics, morality of euthanasia, preventing statistical deaths, assisted reproduction & it’s effect on possible future children, reasoning toolbox, ethics around treatment of mentally ill patients, modern genetics & traditional confidentiality, ethics of medical research, family medicine. It has some illustrations + lots of notes, references & further reading at the back. Mentioned the Gillick case- Children under age of 16 can consent to their own treatment if they're believed to have enough intelligence, competence & understanding to fully understand what's involved in their treatment (Gillick competent). We studied this in our class! Also, mentioned a scenario I found interesting: “If you were a geneticist & found out that John was not the father of the newborn baby, would you tell him of protect the mom’s confidentiality?” It’s interesting cause most geneticists would lie & protect the mother while 3/4 of civilians, especially women, think the man should be told the truth. Interesting difference. Overall, a thought provoking & difficult read, but one worth doing

[Zlikespasta · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first four chapters or so are fairly one-sided and biased, which was a little irritating, but then the book goes on to be much more informative and objective. Overall, definitely a really interesting topic, and the volume is a good crash course.

[Anonymous · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am a medical student. I don't love reading, I love easy reads. This is not an easy read. I am a British student from a leading school and this book is written in such a complicated way. Its content is phenomenal, but the writers have used a thesaurus on every word and it just doesn't roll off the tongue. I have to re-read multiple sentences to get the underlying message Tony Hope is trying to convey. I would recommend this book because it does have good content, it is not a short introduction though. Small book, but written wildly and with such complex overdone language that just isnt colloquial which would have made it sell and appeal to a much greater audience if it had. A shame, but good book for better readers than me.

[Max ☭ · Rating 1 out of 5]

Very short introduction series is always pretty hit or miss, but this one is the bigger miss. There's a passage about choosing 1 of 3 embryos, 2 of them with very high risk of life threatening ailments, 1 healthy one. The author argues that this isn't a cut and dry decision, because "whichever is chosen is gonna be a different person." Technically sound I guess, but embryos aren't people, that's the kind of logic pro-life advocates use against rape victims getting an abortion. It's obvious which one should be chosen if there's a choice, to minimize suffering. That passage isn't the only one with that kinda reasoning. This book is filled with technical jargon with little practical use.

[Joan Embola · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this was awesome. It is definitely a very short introduction as the title says. What i like most about it is the fact that the author poses firm arguments each time about every situation. He also argues on both sides and gives his personal opinion sometimes. You can never know what to expect or what the conclusion is except at the end. It is very fascinating and gives you a very solid understanding of medical ethics.

[Gabz · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was very accesible for an introduction and I liked that the author was very clear on what his opinions were and why they differed from the norm when this was the case. The methods aren't overly complicated and the overview to multiple topics within medical ethics was enjoyable and very well written.

[Sarah · Rating 2 out of 5]

Mediocre writing, sub-par reasoning, uneven application of ostensible principles.
Useful only in showing the moral and philosophical poverty of utilitarianism.

[Mehreen Khuram · Rating 4 out of 5]

Eye opening

[jeffy · Rating 1 out of 5]

Decided to start reading this book mainly because it included euthanasia and ethics in general is quite an interesting topic, especially medical ethics.
I was veryyyy disappointed.
First off it was difficult to follow, the book had no real structure to it and despite it being a 'very short introduction' half of it was waffle. Obviously ethics is a very broad and complicated topic but the author just chose various, random parts of it to write about so the whole thing just didn't make sense.
I think the style of writing was far too complex and when it comes to already complicated topics, the author should be trying to make it as easy to understand as possible. The examples they used weren't any help either cos half of them made no sense and had no real link to the point.
I also just couldn't tell what argument the author was agreeing with cos instead of trying to explore all viewpoints it just felt like they didn't know what to think.
Overall a very, very bad attempt to write about a good topic and I hated the random images in the middle of a chunk of writing.

[awooish · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tıp fakültesi beşinci sınıftayım ve bu yıl seçmeli ders olarak tıp etiği alışımın üçüncü yılı. Kitabın başlığında ''Kısa Bir Giriş'' yazması sebebiyle babamın hediye olarak aldığı bu kitaptan fazla verim alamayacağımı, gördüğüm derslere kıyasla çok daha geri bir seviyede olacağını düşünmüştüm ama büyük bir yanılgı içerisinde olduğumu dördüncü bölümde anladım! Kitabın içindeki vaka örnekleri derste gördüklerimizden çok daha komplike ve doğru tek bir cevaba ulaşmayı zorlayacak türdendi. Kitabın içinde de geçen, derste de öğrendiğimiz tıp etiğinde kullanılan teknikler çoğunlukla en azından benim açımdan yetersiz kaldı. Hatta normalde yaptığım okumalar aksine sorularımı not almam gerekti ve önümüzdeki günlerde hocama fikirlerini danışmayı planlıyorum. İçerisinde bir okuma listesi de var ama ben çok meraklı ve araştırmaya meyilli, inatçı biri -maalesef :)- olmadığımdan sadece Sokrates'in Savunması ile yoluma devam edeceğim. Hem sağlık personellerine hem de ilgili okurlara önerilir.

[Rich · Rating 5 out of 5]

Such a great read! Books like this make me love nonfiction and talking about real things that we all face today. It also is great for conversations with friends.

Hope and Dunn do an amazing job writing the book in an approachable tone that often asks the reader to think independently. Thorough explanations and logical reasoning done succinctly and in a small book that can be brought around anywhere. I even brought it to work by stuffing it in my pocket and reading it in my free time. They touch on many great topics that anyone can find interesting.

To top it all off, you can feel the personality through the text. You run into some funny remarks and pictures. One of the first things you see is a hedgehog and a fox! There are also thorough notes for further reading on the end and you can tell that they put their time into it.

The Dan Parifit non-identity problem thing was actually awesome.

[Rex Libris · Rating 2 out of 5]

I found the reasoning and the positions taken by the author to be rather off-putting. Like too many modern philosophers he commits Chesterton's "disregarding the gate." Chesterton argues modern thinkers disregard the conventions of the past without understanding why they are and how they came to be. He says to imagine coming across a fence and a gate in a field. They do not seem to be there for any reason, so from the vantage point of the now, the reaction is to take them out. But maybe they were put there for a good reason that just is not apparent at the time being. In the same way, Hope seems to be too quick to dismiss the ethical conventions of the past and replace them with his own notions, allegedly based on reason. Is the corollary that previous ethics were not based on reason? I think not.

[M Pereira · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of those surprising books where there's a tightrope of different things to balance and it does it very well. There's the philosophy, the ethical theory, the difference of perspectives, the medical and real life cases and the empirical detail. I tend not to be so hot on the latter two but this really was an interesting work. I was taken very much by the analogy made in the beginning which I think frames the discussion, of the fox and the hedgehog in Isaiah Berlin's book on Tolsoy.

A very slim read, lots of the issues could ahve much more said about them but this is a very nice whistlestop tour for a very thorny and difficult area.

[Nimish · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first parts felt very much like the author was asked to give an impromptu speech on medical ethics and just jotted down what came to mind.

But then, it got really good. It presented Medical Ethics as sort of a real-world philosophy that has real-world consequences in contrast to a series of unrealistic ungrounded thought-experiments (something that philosophers tend to do).

The topic itself is a bit niche, but the way the author uses philosophy and reasoning to work through grounded, impactful principles and recounts them from real medical ethics problems was really great. A good read for that if nothing else.