• English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • English 
    • English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Globethics User Collection
  • Globethics Library Submissions
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Globethics User Collection
  • Globethics Library Submissions
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

All of the LibraryCommunitiesPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsThis CollectionPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsProfilesView

My Account

Login

The Library

AboutSearch GuideContact

Statistics

Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

Critical analysis of the principle of benefit and harm

  • CSV
  • RefMan
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • RefWorks
Thumbnail
Name:
n2eng.pdf
Size:
438.9Kb
Format:
PDF
Download
Author(s)
Rocha Lima Paranhos, Flávio
Keywords
Bioethics
Beneficence
Risk-benefit assessment
Critical path method
GE Subjects
Political ethics
Bioethics
Health ethics
Community ethics

Full record
Show full item record
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/236085
Abstract
"Benefit and harm are essential elements in any consideration of bioethical nature. Preventing harm is already present in the Hippocratic Oath as a central concern. The purpose of this article is to critically analyze the principle of maximizing benefit and minimizing harm. It takes as its starting point the article of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UDBHR) dedicated to this principle. First we propose a more general, philosophical approach grounded in classical authors such as Kant and Mill, but also contemporaries such as Ruwen Ogien and Edgar Morin, among others. We then present several approaches to bioethics in the Brazilian and international literature. At that point we were able to observe a clearly misconceived bias, in that a rather limited concept of benefit is proposed by certain American authors. Using arguments from principalism to defend their positions, these authors (unintentionally) reinforce the need for another standard for bioethical evaluation, the UDBHR."
Date
2015
Type
Article
Copyright/License
Creative Commons Copyright (CC 2.5)
Collections
Globethics Library Submissions

entitlement

 
DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2025)  DuraSpace
Quick Guide | Contact Us
Open Repository is a service operated by 
Atmire NV
 

Export search results

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.