A teoria da moralidade comum na obra de Beauchamp e Childress

Abstract

"Principles of Biomedical Ethics" by Tom L. Beauchamp and James F. Childress, based on the concept of principlism, is the most studied book in the field of bioethics, and played a decisive role in the consolidation and global expansion of the discipline. Its four principles, however, were taken from different theories: the autonomy principle came from Kantian theory (Kant); beneficence, from utilitarian theory (Mill); justice, from the theory of justice (Rawls); and non-maleficence, from the common morality theory (Clouser and Gert). Since the 1990s several criticisms have arisen regarding the epistemological homogeneity of the work. As a result, changes, which are the subject of the present study, have been made to the text from the 4th edition onwards, especially concerning the common morality theory, incorporated in the book as the foundation of principlism. The aim of this study was to examine the inclusion of this theory into principlism, critically analyzing the contents of the last four editions of the book. Keywords: Bioethics. Morals. Ethics, medical. Ethical theory. Resumo A teoria da moralidade comum na obra de Beauchamp e ChildressA obra "Principles of biomedical ethics", de Tom L. Beauchamp e James F. Childress, embasadora do principialismo, é o livro mais estudado no campo da bioética, tendo participado decisivamente do processo de consolidação e expansão mundial da disciplina. Seus quatro princípios, contudo, advêm de teorias diferentes: o princípio da autonomia foi retirado da teoria kantiana (Kant); a beneficência, da teoria utilitarista (Mill); a justiça, da teoria da justiça (Rawls); e a não maleficência, da teoria da moralidade comum (Clouser e Gert). A partir da década de 1990, diversas críticas surgiram quanto à homogeneidade epistemológica da proposta. Foram então introduzidas transformações na obra, que são objeto deste estudo, especialmente a teoria da moralidade comum, incorporada como fundamentação do principialismo, da 4ª edição em diante. O objetivo da pesquisa foi estudar a inclusão da referida teoria ao principialismo, analisando criticamente seu conteúdo a partir das quatro últimas edições do livro. Palavras-chave: Bioética. Princípios morais. Ética médica. Teoria ética. Resumen La teoría de la moralidad común en el trabajo de Beauchamp y ChildressLa obra "Principles of biomedical ethics", escrita por Tom L. Beauchamp y James F. Childress y que guía el principialismo, es el libro más estudiado en bioética, habiendo participado de forma decisiva en su proceso de consolidación y expansión global. Sus cuatro principios, sin embargo, proceden de diferentes teorías: el principio de la autonomía fue retomado de la teoría kantiana (Kant); el de beneficencia, de la teoría utilitarista (Mill); el de justicia, de la teoría de la justicia (Rawls); y el de no-maleficencia, de la teoría de la moralidad común (Clouser y Gert). Desde la década de los años '90 varias críticas han surgido con respecto a la homogeneidad epistemológi-ca de la propuesta. Como resultado, se introdujeron cambi...

Bioética: crítica ao principialismo, Constituição brasileira e princípio da dignidade humana

“…An unpublished study recently carried out by Azambuja and Garrafa 32 has confirmed the pertinence of all the criticism presented so far. These authors analyzed the changes introduced in the last four editions (fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh) of the book "Principles of biomedical ethics".…”

“…The main criticisms formulated by two groups of bioethics scholars will be presented: first, those coming from US authors [23][24][25][26][27] and, second, from bioethicists of European and Latin American origin [28][29][30][31][32][33] . Then the central principles of international and national bioethics will be presented based on the principle of human dignity in the light of the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, national doctrine and legislation.…”

Análisis de la ética de principios, 40 años después

“…Perhaps for this reason it has been widely disseminated and articulated for the use of all ethical committees. But it is also clear that their shortcomings have raised opposition from many areas, difficult gaps to reconcile with moral theories that claim to be universal 39 . Among them are the use of prima facie principles as a starting point, which closes the door to consider that there are intrinsically immoral actions; or the reduction of medical deliberations to physical actions and external results without taking moral action into account; or the variability and ambiguity in the application of the principles, which allows someone or another to do so, provided that it is convincing 40 .…”

“…And here begins the divergence, what is good, when Is it about the human being? We understand that if the basic concept of the whole moral building is not common, all moral theory will be an entelechy, something that Beauchamp and Childress reflect in successive editions 39 . The lack of unifying or at least clarifying concepts leads us to think about the need to re-conceptualize the ethical problems 54 , a comprehensive review, not only of the principles 55 , within a framework of continuous reflection 56 .…”

Termos de esclarecimento e responsabilidade à luz da bioética de intervenção

“…The term "bioethics" was coined in English language in 1971 by the American oncologist Van Rensselaer Potter of the University of Wisconsin, in the book "Bioethics: bridge to the future." Later, André Hellegers of the Center for Bioethics of the Kennedy Institute at Georgetown University used the same term but with a strictly biomedical connotation, unlike the one used by Potter, which was more global and widespread 9 .…”