Goals of Ethics Consultation: Toward Clarity, Utility, and Fidelity

J. André

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/JCE199708211

1997-06-01

Abstract:James A. Tulsky and Ellen Fox made a major contribution to ethics consultation when they convened an expert panel to discuss evaluation issues. The resulting consensus statements appeared in the summer 1996 issue of The Journal of Clinical Ethics. By coincidence, during the time the expert panel was being convened, a task force at Sparrow Hospital in Lansing, Michigan, was engaged in a year-long evaluation of its own ethics consultations. The members of the task force began by articulating what we believed consultations should try to accomplish. It is probably not a coincidence that the goals we formulated closely resemble those drawn up by the Tulsky-Fox panels. A task force on goals, headed by John C. Fletcher and Mark Siegler, drew up a list of four; a separate task force on evaluating outcomes, headed by Fox and Robert Arnold, drew up a separate list, also of four points, which closely resembled the goals list drawn up by Fletcher and Siegler’s panel. The similarity between the results of the two panels, and between their results and those of the Sparrow Hospital Task Force, speaks to a substantial if heretofore unarticulated consensus within the field. The wording of the three lists, however, differs in interesting ways. In what follows I will compare the three lists and argue that the list written by the Sparrow Hospital Task Force is clearer, and so more useful. I will also describe the ways in which the task force put its own goals into operation, which demonstrates that simpler goals allow development within institutions and in the field, and allow differences between institutions. Finally, I will argue that the Sparrow Hospital version is subtly but significantly more faithful to what differentiates ethics consultation from academic case discussion: consultation uses a variety of means to help human beings move toward ethical practice, and these means go beyond the academic virtues of analysis and argument.