Overview of psychiatric ethics IV: the method of casuistry.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this paper is to describe the method of ethical analysis known as casuistry and consider its merits as a basis of ethical deliberation in psychiatry.


CONCLUSIONS
Casuistry approximates the legal arguments of common law. It examines ethical dilemmas by adopting a taxonomic approach to 'paradigm' cases, using a technique akin to that of normative analogical reasoning. Casuistry offers a useful method in ethical reasoning through providing a practical means of evaluating the merits of a particular course of action in a particular clinical situation. As a method ethical moral reasoning in psychiatry, casuistry suffers from a paucity of paradigm cases and its failure to fully contextualize ethical dilemmas by relying on common morality theory as its basis.
Robertson
Michael
M
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and Sydney South West Area Health Service (Eastern Sector), Sydney, NSW, Australia. mrobertson@med.usyd.edu.au
Ryan
Christopher
C
Walter
Garry
G
D001883:Borderline Personality Disorder / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000523:psychology; D032764:Casuistry; D017007:Duty to Warn / Q000941:ethics; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005104:Expert Testimony / Q000941:ethics; D006801:Humans; D007298:Insanity Defense; D016743:Mental Competency; D009517:New South Wales; D011570:Psychiatry / Q000941:ethics*; D011618:Psychotic Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000523:psychology