Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: Whose ethos? Whose ethics? : the contributions of Anabaptist theology and ethics to contemporary biomedical ethics
Author: Klauser, Sylvia M.
Awarding Body: University of Edinburgh
Current Institution: University of Edinburgh
Date of Award: 2002
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access from Institution:
This dissertation argues for the inclusion of Radical Reformation Theology into the discussion of contemporary biomedical ethics. Historically, Anabaptist/Mennonite theology has not had a place in the development of biomedical ethics. Catholic moral theology and various definitions of Protestant theological ethics have shaped the field of biomedical ethics alongside several important philosophical theories. A combination of such theological and philosophical theories of biomedical ethics has been the result of the Belmont Report and has later been expanded into The Four Principles of Biomedical Ethics with its focus on autonomy, beneficence, maleficence, and justice. However, the empirical research among Anabaptist/Mennonite physicians shows that such theories do not make adequate reference to Anabaptist/Mennonite theology and ethics and its approach to agent-based virtue ethics. This theology emphasises servanthood as the model for the physician, peace and non-violent justice as the modus operandi for this servanthood model, and community as the sustaining and sending forum for such servanthood. If these perspectives were included in the contemporary discussion of biomedical ethics, the virtuous agent would be enabled to embody a reconciling relationship- the physician with the patient and vice versa. In Anabaptist/Mennonite theology, agency formation has high priority and happens through the model of observation-participation-embodiment. Theology is therefore observed, participated in, and embodied by the individual agent within the setting of community. Such an agent-focused approach that seeks consensus in biomedical ethics would help to balance a principled approach that seeks to find the lowest common denominator. This agent-based approach could also aid in the process of uncovering the blind spots of contemporary biomedical ethics such as injustices in health care access and resource allocation, discriminatory policy-making, and the favouring of a largely utilitarian-deontological pragmatism in biomedical ethics.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available