Which Institutional Conscience? Awkward, Arbitrary, or Arrogant?

The article critically examines the concept of secular institutional conscience in healthcare, particularly in hospitals, as proposed by Wasserman et al., who argue that secular institutions can possess a conscience similar to religious ones. It highlights concerns about the practical and ethical im...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:American Journal of Bioethics Vol. 26; no. 7; pp. 62 - 65
Autor principal: Fleck, Leonard Michael
Formato: commentary Journal Article
Publicado: Taylor & Francis Ltd Jul2026
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=194782898&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 194782898
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        15265161
        FKZ
      jtl: American Journal of Bioethics
      issn: 15265161
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jul2026
      vid: 26
      iid: 7
      pid: 377
      pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd
      place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    artinfo:
      ui:
        194782898
        194782898
        194782898
        10.1080/15265161.2026.2675916
        194782898
      ppf: 62
      ppct: 3
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
      tig:
        atl: Which Institutional Conscience? Awkward, Arbitrary, or Arrogant?
      aug:
        au: Fleck, Leonard Michael
        affil: Michigan State University
      sug:
        subj:
          Conscience
          Ethics, Organizational
          Health Facilities
          Bioethics
          Decision Making, Organizational
      ab: The article critically examines the concept of secular institutional conscience in healthcare, particularly in hospitals, as proposed by Wasserman et al., who argue that secular institutions can possess a conscience similar to religious ones. It highlights concerns about the practical and ethical implications of allowing institutions to refuse family demands for life-prolonging care based on institutional conscience, especially amid contested definitions of death and medical futility. The discussion emphasizes that appeals to institutional conscience may shift conflicts from bedside decisions to administrative levels without resolving underlying disagreements rooted in value pluralism and trust. The article also questions the legitimacy and consistency of endorsing multiple institutional consciences across diverse healthcare settings, suggesting that such a framework could complicate rather than clarify ethical decision-making in patient care.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        commentary
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N