Honors Theses

Date of Creation

5-2017

Document Type

Thesis

Department

Philosophy

First Advisor

William E. Stempsey, S.J., M.D., Ph.D.

Abstract

This thesis seeks to construct an ethical course of action for concurrent surgery, a practice brought into the public eye by The Boston Globe, which argued against allowing one attending surgeon to oversee two cases on separate patients in different operating rooms. First, the common morality and its four main principles relevant to biomedical ethics will be described which will be subsequently used to show that concurrent surgery is allowed according to non-violation of the principle of non-maleficence through current empirical evidence, and supported by the principle of beneficence and justice. Next, the principle of respect for autonomy will be shown to require informed consent in order to ensure proper patient understanding of the nature of the procedure. This thesis will end by discussing the current public, hospital, and political reactions to the debate in order to summarize current accordance with this thesis’ ethical argument and propose informed recommendations to doctors, hospitals, and law makers, as discussed in the conclusion.

Comments

Presented at the 2017 Academic Conference.

Share

COinS