|
| ||
|
|
||
Care Ethics (care + ethics)
Kinds of Care Ethics Selected AbstractsCARING COMPARISONS: THOUGHTS ON COMPARATIVE CARE ETHICSJOURNAL OF CHINESE PHILOSOPHY, Issue 2 2009VRINDA DALMIYA [source] RECONSTRUCTING MODERN ETHICS: CONFUCIAN CARE ETHICSJOURNAL OF CHINESE PHILOSOPHY, Issue 2 2009ANN A. PANG-WHITE [source] The Unhappy Marriage of Care Ethics and Virtue EthicsHYPATIA, Issue 4 2006Maureen Sander-Staudt The proposal that care ethic(s) (CE) be subsumed under the framework of virtue ethic(s) (VE) is both promising and problematic for feminists. Although some attempts to construe care as a virtue are more commendable than others, they cannot duplicate a freestanding feminist CE. Sander-Staudt recommends a model of theoretical collaboration between VE and CE that retains their comprehensiveness, allows CE to enhance VE as well as be enhanced by it, and leaves CE open to other collaborations. [source] Health care ethics: lessons from intensive careHEALTH EXPECTATIONS, Issue 2 2006Sophie Hill No abstract is available for this article. [source] Between technology and humanity, the impact of technology on health care ethicsNURSING PHILOSOPHY, Issue 1 2003Steven Edwards No abstract is available for this article. [source] The phenomenological ethics of K. E. Løgstrup , a resource for health care ethics and philosophy?NURSING PHILOSOPHY, Issue 1 2001Søren Holm BA MA MD PhD DrMedSci Abstract This paper gives a presentation and critical assessment of the phenomenological philosophy and ethics of the Danish theologian and philosopher K. E. Løgstrup (1905,1981). It is argued that although the ethics of Løgstrup contain valuable insights, an uncritical appropriation as the main source for a health care ethics or a philosophy of caring, is problematic. Løgstrup's philosophy contains a number of internal problems, and does not adequately deal with some problems raised by work in the modern health care setting. [source] CARE ETHICS AND THE GLOBAL PRACTICE OF COMMERCIAL SURROGACYBIOETHICS, Issue 7 2010JENNIFER A. PARKS ABSTRACT This essay will focus on the moral issues relating to surrogacy in the global context, and will critique the liberal arguments that have been offered in support of it. Liberal arguments hold sway concerning reproductive arrangements made between commissioning couples from wealthy nations and the surrogates from socioeconomically weak backgrounds that they hire to do their reproductive labor. My argument in this paper is motivated by a concern for controlling harms by putting the practice of globalized commercial surrogacy into the context of care ethics. As I will argue, the unstable situations into which children of global surrogacy arrangements are born is symbolic of the crisis of care that the practice raises. Using the Baby Manji case as my touch point, I will suggest that liberalism cannot address the harms experienced by Manji and children like her who are created through the global practice of assisted reproductive technology. I will argue that, if commissioning couples consider their proposed surrogacy contracts from a care ethics point of view, they will begin to think relationally about their actions, considering the practice from an ethical lens, not just an economic or contractual one. [source] | |||||||||||||