Truthfulness and Deceit in Dementia Care: An argument for truthful regard as a morally significant human bond.

IF 1.1 4区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1353/ken.2021.0020
Philippa Byers
{"title":"Truthfulness and Deceit in Dementia Care: An argument for truthful regard as a morally significant human bond.","authors":"Philippa Byers","doi":"10.1353/ken.2021.0020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper presents a challenge to the view that benign 'white lies' may be therapeutic in dementia care and preferable to more truthful alternatives. Drawing on Sissela Bok and Bernard Williams, the paper develops three key points: first, that another person's dementia is not a reason to suspend one's customary reluctance to deceive others; second, that the commonly drawn contrast between benign deceit and blunt disclosure is too simple to frame arguments for the acceptability of deceit in dementia care; and third, truthful regard-regard for a person living with dementia as one for whom truth matters, as it does for oneself-is a foundation for beneficent concern that is neither infantilizing nor condescending. The paper proposes that a morally significant human bond is established through regard for another person as one for whom truth matters, just as it does for oneself, irrespective of another's dementia, and that within dementia care, the commission of deceit should be seen as an unsettling exception to a general principle of truthfulness.</p>","PeriodicalId":46167,"journal":{"name":"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal","volume":"31 3","pages":"223-246"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2021.0020","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper presents a challenge to the view that benign 'white lies' may be therapeutic in dementia care and preferable to more truthful alternatives. Drawing on Sissela Bok and Bernard Williams, the paper develops three key points: first, that another person's dementia is not a reason to suspend one's customary reluctance to deceive others; second, that the commonly drawn contrast between benign deceit and blunt disclosure is too simple to frame arguments for the acceptability of deceit in dementia care; and third, truthful regard-regard for a person living with dementia as one for whom truth matters, as it does for oneself-is a foundation for beneficent concern that is neither infantilizing nor condescending. The paper proposes that a morally significant human bond is established through regard for another person as one for whom truth matters, just as it does for oneself, irrespective of another's dementia, and that within dementia care, the commission of deceit should be seen as an unsettling exception to a general principle of truthfulness.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
痴呆症护理中的真实与欺骗:关于真实关怀是一种道德上重要的人类纽带的论证。
这篇论文提出了一个挑战的观点,良性的“善意的谎言”可能是治疗痴呆症护理和更真实的选择。借鉴西西拉•博克和伯纳德•威廉姆斯的观点,论文提出了三个关键点:首先,一个人的痴呆症不能成为一个人暂停惯常不愿欺骗他人的理由;其次,善意的欺骗和坦率的披露之间的普遍对比过于简单,无法为痴呆症护理中欺骗的可接受性提供论据;第三,真诚的关怀——把一个患有痴呆症的人当作一个关心真相的人,就像关心自己一样——是慈善关怀的基础,既不是幼稚化,也不是居高俯下。这篇论文提出,一种具有道德意义的人类纽带是通过把另一个人视为真理重要的人而建立起来的,就像对自己一样,不管对方是否患有痴呆症,在痴呆症护理中,欺骗行为应该被视为诚实一般原则的一个令人不安的例外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal offers a scholarly forum for diverse views on major issues in bioethics, such as analysis and critique of principlism, feminist perspectives in bioethics, the work of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, active euthanasia, genetics, health care reform, and organ transplantation. Each issue includes "Scope Notes," an overview and extensive annotated bibliography on a specific topic in bioethics, and "Bioethics Inside the Beltway," a report written by a Washington insider updating bioethics activities on the federal level.
期刊最新文献
Contributors Editor's Note Data Solidarity Disrupted: Musings On the Overlooked Role of Mutual Aid in Data-Driven Medicine Allergic Intimacies: Food, Disability, Desire, and Risk by Michael Gill (review) Green Light Ethics: A Theory of Permissive Consent and its Moral Metaphysics by Hallie Liberto (review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1