A response to Dubler's commentary on "surmounting elusive barriers: the case for bioethics mediation".
Dubler's commentary focuses on knowledge of clinical medicine and "institutional savvy" as pieces of the skill set required of bioethics mediators. Here, I describe why, as a practical matter, such requirements are unlikely to be achieved by a meaningful number of aspirants. Simultaneously, I examine the reasons why Dubler's criteria are inherently risk-laden and would be better addressed as a dialogue among experienced practitioners regarding the merits of alternative stylistic approaches, rather than as universal threshold criteria for the practice of bioethics mediation.
Penn Clinical Ethics Mediation Program, Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, USA. ejb@gear3.net
Edward J
EJ
Bergman
D001675:Bioethics / Q000639:trends*; D016265:Conflict of Interest; D003220:Conflict, Psychological; D026822:Ethicists / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D017008:Negotiating; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations / Q000941:ethics*; D011209:Power, Psychological