La enseñanza de la ética moderna

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

En el estudio se recalca, por su importancia, la influencia del positivismo, de la ética utilitarista, el surgimiento de la "bioética ", de los centros de investigación en bioética, y los cambios en el modo de abordaje de los problemas ético-médicos. Se revisan también los cambios político-económicos, la participación estatal en la atención a la salud y el cambio hacia la medicina socializada. En el área educativa, la importancia del perfil profesional y la influencia del conductismo. En el área del conocimiento, los profundos cambios científico-tecnológicos acaecidos en las últimas décadas, la mayor participación de los pacientes en las decisiones que involucran a su salud y la influencia de la prensa y la televisión en la divulgación de los aciertos y fallas en la atención médica. La segunda parte del trabajo explora, como consecuencia de lo expuesto, la necesidad de la enseñanza de la Bioética, los objetivos educacionales que involucraría, las estrategias educativas que están utilizándose en diversos sitios y las posibles formas de evaluar este aprendizaje.

Translated abstract

Due to its importance, the study underlined the influence of positivism and of utilitarian ethics, the emergence of "bioethics" and bioethics research centers, and the changes in the way of addressing ethical-medical problems. Also, the political-economic changes, the state involvement in health care and the change toward socialized medicine were reviewed. Likewise, in the educational area the study analyzed the importance of professional profile and the influence of conductivism. In the field of knowlege, it dealt with the profound scientific-technological changes in the last few decades, the greater participation of patients in the decision-making involving their health and the impact of press and TV on dissemination of achievements and failures in the medical care area. The second part explored as a consequence of the above-mentioned, the need for the teaching of bioethics, the educational objectives involved, the educational strategies which are being used in various places and the possible ways of evaluating the learning process.

Related collections

Most cited references 40

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

[Medicine and society. Schools of thought in the health field].

J C García (1983)

The article considers the answers given by different schools of thought to the fundamental questions about the degree of autonomy of medicine and the kind of articulation between medicine and society as a whole and in its "parts." The answers vary with the thinking in the different social sciences and the philosophic schools associated with them. The author divides his presentation in two broad chapters: The first covers schools of thought in the health field, and attempts to delineate the philosophical foundations underlying the principal current schools of thought in this field, without attempting a history of the philosophical schools or analyzing each of them in detail. Thus, two idealist currents are studied which have exerted great influence in the health field--neopositivism and neo-Kantianism--and marxism as the materialist school, which recognizes the primary of matter, nature, and objective reality, and views consciousness as a property of matter. The second chapter considers the theoretical contest now going on among the schools of thought discussed in the first chapter, which try to explain the relationship between medicine and the social structure; the effectiveness of medical action, and the social determinants of disease. Prior to the seventies, the author says, the dominant view of the autonomy of medicine, its effectiveness, the potential for social change of the medical institutions, and the benefits to health of economic development, was endorsed by the predominance of positivism among these schools of medical thought. The view that medicine was broadly autonomous and at the same level with other subsystems such as the economic, the political and the educational subsystems, assumed the possibility of changing society by an effort begun through any of these "sectors." The enormous growth of productive forces that took place in the developed capitalist countries during the fifties, and even more during the sixties, collided at the end of the latter decade with the existing social production relations, which checked the progress of the production forces and generated a series of challenges in civil society to the aims of economic development and the achievements of science in relation to the inequality of the distribution of wealth. In the health sector, this was a time of criticism of the positivist view and of pointing out the negative effects of medicalization, highlighting the ideological and self-perpetuating character of medical institutions, and proposals for the demedicalization of society.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)