This lecture addresses current tensions in medical ethics as it has developed in the past thirty years. Debates now rage about the importance of principles versus personal character, rights versus responsibilities, and individual autonomy versus concerns for the well being of patients. Moreover, the public nature of medical ethical problems, which are often addressed in the secular sphere, has tended to obscure the role of religious ethics within medical ethics. Margaret Farley proposes a new approach to all of these issues, an approach that takes account of women's experience, feminist ethics, and the potential contributions of religious traditions to problems encountered in the medical context. She includes considerations of particular issues such as decisions for death and requirements of justice in the effective worldwide distribution of medical care. †
Margaret Farley defines mercy as love for those who are in need in this slender yet powerful consideration of what is right and good in responding to human suffering. She suggests that, "true care will respond with actions that are needed, appropriate in a relationship and possible," reminding caregivers to ask those suffering for what they want/need, to remember the sufferer's greater context and not reduce them to their traumas and to be pragmatic in the care offered. Respect and compassion are not mutually exclusive guidelines for ethics. "Love itself is the most needed of all mercies." Farley's Christian orientation is explicit as she claims, "there is a love stronger than death, a crucified love that does not turn away from swords of sorrow, and that goes forth unconditionally no matter what the forces of evil may do against it. The point of the cup and the cross is not death, but that relationships can hold."
I find her arguments clear and compelling, but wonder how non-Christians would view it. Does the foundation alienate? The book seems especially suited to hospital chaplaincy and pastoral care.