Principlism in Bioethics

When making a ethical decision, principlism uses a moral approach based on judgments that are generally accepted by cultural and religious traditions. Because principlism is a general “framework” of norms, it can provide a more concrete guidance for nonspecific norms and procedures by using specification. Because prinicplism is not absolute, further specification needs to occur. These specifications convert broad norms into a much more solid principle. In 1978, the National Commission published “The Belmont Report” for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research to expand regulations in protecting human subjects. There are four principles that specify these general norms into concrete guidance in moral deliberation. These principles are respect for Autonomy, No maleficence, Beneficence, and Justice. Respect for autonomy refers to the respect for persons. Nonmaleficence ensures that persons are to not harm others intentionally. Beneficence inquire that persons should be treated in a ethically matter. Making sure that all individuals are treated equally and fairly is the principle of justice. Working together, these principles ensure that people are able to make autonomous decisions. They also promote a effective outcome of principlism.

Bio medically speaking, it is significant to specify and create a specific action-guide norm. According to Valdes, the principle of nonmaleficence, “do not harm”, does not explain exactly what is meant by do not harm (177). Being more specific by specifying and analyzing what the content means is important when decisions are needed to be made. When norms aren’t concrete and specific, misinformation can occur. For example, “do not harm” can lead to uncertainty for a physician who has to make a decision for a patient. Firstly, it is a physician’s job to ensure that the patient receives the best care and clearly understands the information that he/she receives. So, should a physician withhold treatment...