The major dilemma for bioethics is choosing an appropriate method of ethical analysis, one that when applied to individual cases can illuminate if not resolve vexing ethical issues for providers and their patients. Two of these books offer direction in this regard. The framework Carson Strong adopts and makes a compelling case for in Ethics in Reproductive and Perinatal Medicine: A New Framework is one of modified casuistry. Casuistry, imported to bioethics by Jonsen and Toulmin, is a practical, case-based method of ethical decisionmaking. It relies on comparison between moral factors in a case under consideration and in paradigm cases with justifications for different outcomes. The preferred course of action is the one warranted by the paradigm case that most resembles the case under consideration. Strong's framework is a modified form of casuistry because it takes into account social and political views and allows for, upon occasion, a prioritization of values across cases.

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will igve you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.