Premium
CLINICAL ETHICS AND NURSING: “YES” TO CARING, BUT “NO” TO A FEMALE ETHICS OF CARE
Author(s) -
KUHSE HELGA
Publication year - 1995
Publication title -
bioethics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.494
H-Index - 55
eISSN - 1467-8519
pISSN - 0269-9702
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1995.tb00356.x
Subject(s) - ethics of care , nursing ethics , silence , economic justice , applied ethics , normative ethics , meta ethics , nursing , clinical ethics , feminist ethics , psychology , sociology , engineering ethics , medicine , epistemology , law , political science , philosophy , gender studies , aesthetics , psychiatry , engineering
According to a contemporary school of thought there is a specific female approach to ethics which is based not on abstract “male” ethical principles or rules, but on “care”. Nurses have taken a keen interest in these female approaches to ethics. Drawing on the views expounded by Carol Gilligan and Nel Noddings, nurses claim that a female “ethics of care” better captures their moral experiences than a traditional male “ethics of justice”. This paper argues that “care” is best understood in a dispositional sense, that is, as sensitivity and responsiveness to the particularities of a situation and the needs of “concrete” others. While “care”, in this sense, is necessary for ethics, it is not sufficient. Ethics needs “justice” as well as “care”. If women and nurses excessively devalue principles and norms, they will be left without the theoretical tools to condemn some actions or practices, and to defend others. They will, like generations of nurses before them, be condemned to silence.