Commentary on Fiester's "Ill-placed democracy: ethics consultations and the moral status of voting".
Autumn Fiester identifies an important element in clinical ethics consultation (CEC) that she labels, from the Greek, aporia, "state of perplexity," evidenced in CEC as ethical ambiguity. Fiester argues that the inherent difficulties of cases so characterized render them inappropriate for voting and more amenable to mediation and the search for consensus. This commentary supports Fiester's analysis and adds additional reasons for rejecting voting as a process for resolving disputes in CEC including: it distorts the analysis by empowering individual voters preferences and biases rather than focusing on the interests and wishes of the patient and family; it offers an insufficiently sensitive model for resolving the awesome, nuanced, conflicted, and ethically complex issues surrounding life and death; it marginalizes minority opinions that may have moral validity.
Montefiore-Einstein Bioethics Center, New York City, NY, USA. ndubler@montefiore.org
Nancy Neveloff
NN
Dubler
D003220:Conflict, Psychological; D003709:Democracy; D033061:Ethics Consultation / Q000941:ethics*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D028681:Moral Obligations; D017008:Negotiating; D011057:Politics; D012945:Social Values