2013, Vol.16, No.3

Korean Journal of Medical Ethics 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 1.21

pISSN : 2005-8284 / eISSN : 2234-3598
https://journal.kci.go.kr/medethics

Traditional medical ethics which underpins its basis on ‘four principles’ is not sufficient for guiding doctors in complex medical situation. This paper explores Dasan (茶山) Jeong Yakyong’s thought about the concept of Mercy (慈) in Mokminsimseo (牧民心書) that may work as a guidance for modern medicine. Firstly, we try to understand Dasan's thought and the keynote of Mokminsimseo (牧民心書). Nextly, this paper explain the meaning of what is Dasan (茶山) Jeong Yakyong’s the concept of Mercy (慈). Finally, we emphasize that Jeong Yakyong’s the concept of Mercy (慈) can be the principle of doctor's professionalism.

Over the last few decades ‘respect for autonomy’ has emerged as one of the most important ethical principles governing modern medicine. This is due at least in part to the influence of Beauchamp and Childress’s Principles of Biomedical Ethics. However, there seem to be two major problems with this principle of respect for autonomy: one is that it has become something of a dogma; the other is that the concept of autonomy is unclear. In many areas of life, including that of medical care, it is difficult to discern which agents are truly autonomous, which decisions (or acts) are truly autonomous and, accordingly, which of these are to be respected. It seems that a better understanding of autonomy is very much needed. This article responds to that need by providing a careful examination of both rationalist and care-based conceptions of autonomy. It argues that rationalist conceptions of autonomy cannot account for cases of akrasia, and that care-based conceptions of autonomy help to illuminate the intimate relationship between autonomy and the emotions.

The normative principles of medical ethics are classified into two categories: traditional ethical theories (utilitarianism and deontological ethics) and empirical principles like the Hippocratic Oath. Each of these two streams of medical ethics has strengths and limitations. This article presents social contract theory as a new approach to understanding medical ethics. On this view, medical professions are based on social contracts for protecting patients from therapists with no licenses. These social contracts consist of hyper-norms, general or whole social contracts, regulations, stewardships and personal contracts. Medical professionals and medical societies both must uphold all of the social responsibilities (including legal liability) of these contracts. In order to strengthen the observance of these social contracts, this article proposes a process of medical ethical decision-making based on social contracts. Additionally, to reduce patient-physician conflicts, this article identifies the appropriate decision-making participants and argues for the necessity of hierarchical clinical ethics committees.