Serious professional misconduct and the need for an apology

Clinical Ethics 5 (3):130-135 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper I argue that doctors who are found guilty of serious professional misconduct should be required to apologize as a condition of their registration. I argue that such a requirement is to be justified on the basis of the need to protect patients, maintain public confidence in the profession, and declare and uphold proper standards of conduct and behaviour. I also answer an objection that might be made to the position I defend. Finally, I consider whether there should be any exceptions to the demand for an apology from doctors who have been found guilty of serious professional misconduct.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,423

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Suffering, Euthanasia and Professional Expertise.Symons Xavier - 2016 - Solidarity: The Journal of Catholic Social Thought and Secular Ethics 6 (1):Article 5.
My Conscience May Be My Guide, but You May not Need to Honor It.Hugh Lafollette - 2017 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 26 (1):44-58.
Is care a virtue for health care professionals?Howard J. Curzer - 1993 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 18 (1):51-69.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-14

Downloads
79 (#266,964)

6 months
8 (#610,780)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Demian Whiting
University of Hull

Citations of this work

Communication: illusion or reality?Sue Eckstein - 2010 - Clinical Ethics 5 (3):113-114.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Add more references