Korean | English

pISSN : 2005-8284 / eISSN : 2234-3598

2020 KCI Impact Factor : 1.31
Aims & Scope
The Korea Society for Medical Ethics is an academic organization involving professionals from medical education and research institutes such as medicine, nursing, and dentistry. We are an academic organization established to promote the development and national competitiveness of education and research activities in this field and to promote information exchange and friendship among members through researching and educating medical ethics issues. The Korea Journal of Medical Ethics is the official journal of The Korea Society for Medical Ethics, which publishes the contents of 'medical ethics', 'medical ethics education' and 'academic research dealing with ethical, legal, and social aspects of biomedical science'.
YOO Sangho

(Hanyang University College of Medicine, Medical Ethics)

Citation Index
  • KCI IF(2yr) : 1.31
  • KCI IF(5yr) : 0.92
  • Centrality Index(3yr) : 1.905
  • Immediacy Index : 0.4615

Current Issue : 2021, Vol.24, No.4

  • A Comparison of the Korean Medical Association’s Ethics Guidelines and the American Medical Association’s Code of Ethics

    PARK Hyoung-Wook | 2021, 24(4) | pp.385~408 | number of Cited : 0
    Abstract PDF
    In 2017, the Korean Medical Association (KMA) revised its Code of Ethics and Ethics Guidelines. This study compares the KMA’s Ethics Guidelines with the Code of Medical Ethics of the American Medical Association (AMA). This comparison identifies several points in the KMA’s Ethics Guidelines that are in need of further attention and possible revision. In particular, the KMA’s Guidelines should (a) describe the rights of patients prior to explaining the duties of physicians, (b) explicitly state that patients have a right to self-determination, (c) distinguish between informed consent for pediatric versus minor patients, (d) describe the ethical standards for doctors in non-clinical roles, (e) provide guidance for the ethical issues raised in relation to quarantine, and (f) describe ethical standards related to medical testimony. This study also suggests that the KMA should establish a committee to reflect upon and further improve its Ethics Guidelines.
  • Reinforcing Professionalism through Medical Ethics Education Based on Arete

    KIM Min Ji | KIM Jun | KIM Seon-Kyoung | 2021, 24(4) | pp.409~422 | number of Cited : 0
    Abstract PDF
    This article examines the current status and limitations of medical ethics courses in 40 medical schools in South Korea. Weaknesses in these medical ethics curricula are identified through an analysis of students’ opinions. It is found that medical ethics education in South Korea is focused primarily on normative ethics and case-based learning while character education is largely overlooked. However, if the goal of medical ethics education is to nurture ethical virtues and medical professionalism, it is essential that medical students also receive some thinking training based on principles in virtue ethics. Accordingly, this article argues that the ten character virtues identified by the Korean Educational Development Institute should be incorporated into the case-based instructional methods used in medical ethics curricula in South Korea.
  • Ethical Issues concerning Health Data Ownership

    CHA Hyunjae | KIM Junhewk | 2021, 24(4) | pp.423~459 | number of Cited : 0
    Abstract PDF
    In recent years, with the rise of the data economy, the amount of personal health data that is collected and stored has increased significantly and raised ethical and legal concerns over the question of who owns this data. This article reviews the relevant legislation in Korea, the EU, the US, and Japan and shows that in the current legal context there are practical problems with the concept of health data ownership. However, rather than abolishing that concept, this article attempts to situate it in a new ethical framework. Using Fraser’s critical theory of justice, which distinguishes between issues of redistribution versus recognition, this article argues that health data ownership should be understood in terms of a just relationship between data parties and data.