Phenomenology, Saudi Arabia, and an argument for the standardization of clinical ethics consultation

Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2021 Mar 12;16(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s13010-021-00099-6.

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study is to make a philosophical argument against the phenomenological critique of standardization in clinical ethics. We used the context of clinical ethics in Saudi Arabia to demonstrate the importance of credentialing clinical ethicists.

Methods: Philosophical methods of argumentation and conceptual analysis were used.

Results: We found the phenomenological critique of standardization to be flawed because it relies on a series of false dichotomies.

Conclusions: We concluded that the phenomenological framing of the credentialing debate relies upon two extreme views to be navigated between, not chosen among, in the credentialing of clinical ethicists.

Keywords: Clinical ethics consultation; Credentialing; Phenomenology; Saudi Arabia.

MeSH terms

  • Ethicists
  • Ethics Consultation*
  • Ethics, Clinical
  • Humans
  • Reference Standards
  • Saudi Arabia