Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T20:38:53.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 3 - Healthcare Ethics and Professional Regulation in Operating Department Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2022

By
Edmund Horowicz  and
Amy Williams
Edited by
Daniel Rodger ,
Kevin Henshaw ,
Paul Rawling  and
Scott Miller
Daniel Rodger
Affiliation:
Senior Lecturer in Perioperative Practice, London South Bank University
Kevin Henshaw
Affiliation:
Associate Head of Allied Health Professions, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk
Paul Rawling
Affiliation:
Senior Lecturer in Perioperative Practice, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk
Scott Miller
Affiliation:
Consultant Anaesthetist, St Helens and Knowsley Hospitals NHS Trust
Get access

Summary

In acknowledging that ethics should be regarded as the cornerstone of healthcare practice and the significance of professional regulation for healthcare practitioners providing patient care, it is vital to develop an understanding of how and why this is the case. This chapter has been written to support all perioperative practitioners in developing this knowledge in the context of the operating theatre. The chapter includes discussion of some of the key moral theories and frameworks that may be used to guide reflective, ethical decision making before moving on to consider the role of professional codes and regulation in prescribing and enforcing standards of professional conduct and directing ethical decision making.

Keywords

EthicsMoral TheoryPrinciplismProfessionalismRegulationConscientious Objection
Type
Chapter
Information
Fundamentals of Operating Department Practice , pp. 15 - 27
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Harris, J.. The scope and importance of bioethics. In Bioethics, ed. Harris., J Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
Gillon., R. Philosophical Medical Ethics. Chichester: Wiley, 1986.Google Scholar
Beauchamp, T. L. and Childress., J. F. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 7th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.Google Scholar
Dunn, M and Hope., T. Medical Ethics: A Very Short Introduction, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.Google Scholar
Benjamin, M and Curtis., J. Ethics in Nursing, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Laurie, G. T., Harmon, S. H. E., and Porter., G. Mason and McCall Smith’s Law and Medical Ethics, 10th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
Rachels., J. Ethical theory and bioethics. In Kuhse, H. and Singer, P. (eds.), A Companion to Bioethics, 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 2009, pp. 15–23.Google Scholar
Pattinson., S. D. Medical Law and Ethics, 6th ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2020.Google Scholar
Häyry., M. Utilitarianism and bioethics. In Ashcroft, R. E., Dawson, A., Draper, H., and McMillan, J. (eds.), Principles of Health Care Ethics. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2007, pp. 303–336.Google Scholar
Herring, J.. Medical Law and Ethics, 8th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smart, J. J. C. and Williams., B. Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Singer., P. Practical Ethics, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.Google Scholar
Davis., N. Contemporary deontology. In Singer, P. A (ed.), A Companion to Ethics. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 1993, pp. 305–323.Google Scholar
McNaughton, D. and Rawling, J. P.. Deontology. In Ashcroft, R. E., Dawson, A., Draper, H., and McMillan, J. (eds.), Principles of Health Care Ethics. Chichester:John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2007, pp. 337–364.Google Scholar
Hill, T. Jr. Kantianism. In LaFollette, H. and Persson, I. (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley–Blackwell, 2013, pp. 311–331.Google Scholar
O’Neill, O.. Kantian ethics. In Singer, P. A. (ed.), A Companion to Ethics. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 1993, pp. 263–277.Google Scholar
Trianosky., G. What is virtue ethics all about? American Philosophical Quarterly 1990; 27: 335–344.Google Scholar
Oakley., J. A virtue ethics approach. In Kuhse, H. and Singer, P. (eds.), A Companion to Bioethics, 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 2009, pp. 91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland., S. The virtue ethics approach to bioethics. Bioethics 2011; 25: 192–201.Google Scholar
Gordon, J. S., Rauprich, O., and Vollmann., J. Applying the four‐principle approach. Bioethics 2011; 25: 293–300.Google Scholar
Harris., J. M. In praise of unprincipled ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 2003; 29: 303–306.Google Scholar
Gillon, R. Defending the four principles approach as a good basis for good medical practice and therefore for good medical ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 2015; 41: 111–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dworkin., G. Paternalism. In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2006; Available from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/paternalism/.Google Scholar
Harrison., N. Regressing or progressing: what next for the doctor–patient relationship? The Lancet Respiratory Medicine 2018; 6: 178–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodger, D. and Blackshaw., B. P. Using animal-derived constituents in anaesthesia and surgery: the case for disclosing to patients. BMC Medical Ethics 2019; 20: 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cullity, G.. Beneficence. In Ashcroft, R. E., Dawson, A., Draper, H., and McMillan, J. (eds.), Principles of Health Care Ethics. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2007, pp. 159–190.Google Scholar
Goold, I and Herring., J. Great Debates in Medical Law and Ethics. London: Macmillan International Higher Education, 2018.Google Scholar
Cruess, S. R., Johnston, S., and Cruess., R. L. ‘Profession’: a working definition for medical educators. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 2004; 16: 74–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pellegrino., E. D. Professionalism, profession and the virtues of the good physician. The Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine 2002; 69: 378–389.Google Scholar
Department of Health and Social Care. The regulation of physician associates (PAs) and anaesthesia associates (AAs). Available from: www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2019-07-18/HCWS1741/.Google Scholar
Department of Health and Social Care. The regulation of medical associate professionals in the UK, consultation response. Available from: www.gov.uk/government/consultations/regulating-medical-associate-professions-in-the-uk.Google Scholar
Health and Social Care (Safety and Quality) Act 2015. Available from: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/28/contents/enacted.Google Scholar
The Health Professions Order 2001. Available from: www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/254/article/39/madeGoogle Scholar
Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001. Available from: www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/253/contents/made.Google Scholar
Health and Care Professions Council. Standards of conduct performance and ethics. Available from: www.hcpc-uk.org/standards/standards-of-conduct-performance-and-ethics/.Google Scholar
Nursing and Midwifery Council. The Code: professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses, midwives and nursing associates. Available from: www.nmc.org.uk/standards/code/.Google Scholar
Nursing and Midwifery Council. Staying on the register. Available from: www.nmc.org.uk/registration/staying-on-the-register/.Google Scholar
Health and Care Professions Council. Registration renewals. Available from: www.hcpc-uk.org/registration/registration-renewals/.Google Scholar
Health and Care Professions Council. Threshold policy for fitness to practise investigations. Available from: www.hcpc-uk.org/globalassets/resources/policy/threshold-policy-for-fitness-to-practise-investigations.pdf.Google Scholar
Nursing and Midwifery Council. Fitness to practise library. Available from: www.nmc.org.uk/ftp-library/.Google Scholar
Blench., D. How regulators deal with poor registrant behaviour: the fitness to practise process explored. Professional Standards Authority Blog, 1 August 2018. Available from: www.professionalstandards.org.uk/news-and-blog/blog/detail/blog/2018/08/01/how-regulators-deal-with-poor-registrant-behaviour-the-fitness-to-practise-process-explored.Google Scholar
Health and Care Professions Council. Fitness to practise. Available from: www.hcpc-uk.org/concerns/what-we-investigate/fitness-to-practise/.Google Scholar
General Medical Council. Information for doctors under investigation. Available from: www.gmc-uk.org/concerns/information-for-doctors-under-investigation.Google Scholar
Health and Care Professions Council. Standards of proficiency: operating department practitioners. Available from: www.hcpc-uk.org/resources/standards/standards-of-proficiency-operating-department-practitioners/.Google Scholar
Nursing and Midwifery Council. Aims and principles for fitness to practice, No 2. NMC fitness to practise library. Available from: www.nmc.org.uk/ftp-library/understanding-fitness-to-practise/using-fitness-to-practise/.Google Scholar
Wicclair., M. Conscientious Objection in Healthcare: An Ethical Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giubilini, A. and Savulescu, J.. Conscientious objection in healthcare: problems and perspectives. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2017; 26: 3–5.Google Scholar
Fovargue, S., McGuinnes, S., Mullock, A., and Smith, S.. Conscience and proper medical treatment. Medical Law Review 2015, 23: 173–176.Google Scholar
Wicclair., M. Is conscientious objection incompatible with a physician’s professional obligations? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2008; 29: 171–185.Google Scholar
Savulescu, J. and Schuklenk., U. Doctors have no right to refuse medical assistance in dying, abortion or contraception. Bioethics 2017; 31: 162–170.Google Scholar
Neal, M. and Fovargue., S. Is conscientious objection incompatible with healthcare professionalism? The New Bioethics 2019; 25: 221–235.Google Scholar
Wicclair, M.. Conscientious objection in healthcare and moral integrity. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2017; 26: 7–17.Google Scholar
Schuklenk, U.. Conscience‑based refusal of patient care in medicine: a consequentialist analysis. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2019; 40: 523–538.Google Scholar
West-Oram, P. and Buyx., A. Conscientious objection in healthcare provision: a new dimension. Bioethics 2016; 30: 336–343.Google Scholar
Savulescu, J.. Conscientious objection in medicine. British Medical Journal 2006; 332: 294–297.Google Scholar
Trigg, R.. Conscientious objection and ‘effective referral’. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2017; 26: 32–43.Google Scholar
Giubilini., A. Conscientious objection and medical tribunals. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2016; 42: 78–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Available from: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/37/introduction.Google Scholar
Abortion Act 1967. Available from: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/87/contents.Google Scholar
Doogan v. Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board [2013] SCIH 36.Google Scholar
Janaway v. Salford Area General Authority [1989] AC 537 (HL).Google Scholar
Campbell., M Conscientious objection, health care and Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Medical Law International 2011; 11: 284–304.Google Scholar
General Medical Council. Guidance on personal beliefs and medical practice. Available from: www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-guidance-for-doctors/personal-beliefs-and-medical-practice.Google Scholar
Nursing and Midwifery Council. Conscientious objection by nurses, midwives and nursing associates. Available from: www.nmc.org.uk/standards/code/conscientious-objection-by-nurses-and-midwives/.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×