Key result
Analysis of ethical issues over a few decades suggests that while core values remain stable, secondary or derived values are subject to change and controversy.
The paper highlights the distinction between stable core ethical values and evolving secondary values.
Core values anchor clinical ethics decisions; leaves open how shifting secondary values shape research ethics priorities.
The hypothesis that values change and evolve is examined by this paper. The discussion is based on a series of examples where, over a period of a few decades, new ethical issues have arisen and values have changed. From this analysis it is suggested that there are a series of core values around which most people would agree. These are unlikely to change over long time periods. There are then a series of secondary or derived values around which there is much more controversy and within which differences of view occur. Such changes need to be documented if we are to understand the process involved in the evolution of differences in ethical views.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kenneth C. Calman (2004) conducted a review in Evolutionary ethics. Analysis of ethical issues over a few decades suggests that while core values remain stable, secondary or derived values are subject to change and controversy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: