Reply to Ann Bradshaw

4Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

My original paper suggested that an ethics of care which failed to specify how, and about what, to care would be devoid of normative and descriptive content. Bradshaw's approach provides such a specification and is, therefore, not devoid of such content. However, as all ethical approaches suggest something about the 'what' and 'how' of care, they are all 'ethics of care' in this broader sense. This reinforces rather than undermines my original conclusion. Furthermore, Bradshaw's 'ethics of care' has philosophical and historical problems which I outline.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Allmark, P. (1996). Reply to Ann Bradshaw. Journal of Medical Ethics. BMJ Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.22.1.13

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free