Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > No Blame No Gain?

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

No Blame No Gain?: From a No Blame Culture to a Responsibility Culture in Medicine

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

No Blame No Gain? From a No Blame Culture to a Responsibility Culture in Medicine. / Parker, Joshua; Davies, Ben.
In: Journal of Applied Philosophy, Vol. 37, No. 4, 31.08.2020, p. 646-660.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Parker, J & Davies, B 2020, 'No Blame No Gain? From a No Blame Culture to a Responsibility Culture in Medicine', Journal of Applied Philosophy, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 646-660. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12433

APA

Vancouver

Parker J, Davies B. No Blame No Gain? From a No Blame Culture to a Responsibility Culture in Medicine. Journal of Applied Philosophy. 2020 Aug 31;37(4):646-660. Epub 2020 May 10. doi: 10.1111/japp.12433

Author

Parker, Joshua ; Davies, Ben. / No Blame No Gain? From a No Blame Culture to a Responsibility Culture in Medicine. In: Journal of Applied Philosophy. 2020 ; Vol. 37, No. 4. pp. 646-660.

Bibtex

@article{cdadd1e51c6142729d358c9868296e1f,
title = "No Blame No Gain?: From a No Blame Culture to a Responsibility Culture in Medicine",
abstract = "Healthcare systems need to consider not only how to prevent error, but how to respond to errors when they occur. In the United Kingdom{\textquoteright}s National Health Service, one strand of this latter response is the {\textquoteleft}No Blame Culture{\textquoteright}, which draws attention from individuals and towards systems in the process of understanding an error. Defences of the No Blame Culture typically fail to distinguish between blaming someone and holding them responsible. This article argues for a {\textquoteleft}responsibility culture{\textquoteright}, where healthcare professionals are held responsible in cases of foreseeable and avoidable errors. We demonstrate how healthcare professionals can justifiably be held responsible for their errors even though they work in challenging circumstances. We then review the idea of {\textquoteleft}responsibility without blame{\textquoteright}, applying this to cases of error in healthcare. Sensitive to the undesirable effects of blaming healthcare professionals and to the moral significance of holding individuals accountable, we argue that a responsibility culture has significant advantages over a No Blame Culture due to its capacity to enhance patient safety and support medical professionals in learning from their mistakes, while also recognising and validating the legitimate sense of responsibility that many medical professionals feel following avoidable error, and motivating medical professionals to report errors.",
keywords = "blame, liability, medical ethics, professional ethics, Responsibility",
author = "Joshua Parker and Ben Davies",
year = "2020",
month = aug,
day = "31",
doi = "10.1111/japp.12433",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "646--660",
journal = "Journal of Applied Philosophy",
issn = "0264-3758",
publisher = "Carfax Publishing Ltd.",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - No Blame No Gain?

T2 - From a No Blame Culture to a Responsibility Culture in Medicine

AU - Parker, Joshua

AU - Davies, Ben

PY - 2020/8/31

Y1 - 2020/8/31

N2 - Healthcare systems need to consider not only how to prevent error, but how to respond to errors when they occur. In the United Kingdom’s National Health Service, one strand of this latter response is the ‘No Blame Culture’, which draws attention from individuals and towards systems in the process of understanding an error. Defences of the No Blame Culture typically fail to distinguish between blaming someone and holding them responsible. This article argues for a ‘responsibility culture’, where healthcare professionals are held responsible in cases of foreseeable and avoidable errors. We demonstrate how healthcare professionals can justifiably be held responsible for their errors even though they work in challenging circumstances. We then review the idea of ‘responsibility without blame’, applying this to cases of error in healthcare. Sensitive to the undesirable effects of blaming healthcare professionals and to the moral significance of holding individuals accountable, we argue that a responsibility culture has significant advantages over a No Blame Culture due to its capacity to enhance patient safety and support medical professionals in learning from their mistakes, while also recognising and validating the legitimate sense of responsibility that many medical professionals feel following avoidable error, and motivating medical professionals to report errors.

AB - Healthcare systems need to consider not only how to prevent error, but how to respond to errors when they occur. In the United Kingdom’s National Health Service, one strand of this latter response is the ‘No Blame Culture’, which draws attention from individuals and towards systems in the process of understanding an error. Defences of the No Blame Culture typically fail to distinguish between blaming someone and holding them responsible. This article argues for a ‘responsibility culture’, where healthcare professionals are held responsible in cases of foreseeable and avoidable errors. We demonstrate how healthcare professionals can justifiably be held responsible for their errors even though they work in challenging circumstances. We then review the idea of ‘responsibility without blame’, applying this to cases of error in healthcare. Sensitive to the undesirable effects of blaming healthcare professionals and to the moral significance of holding individuals accountable, we argue that a responsibility culture has significant advantages over a No Blame Culture due to its capacity to enhance patient safety and support medical professionals in learning from their mistakes, while also recognising and validating the legitimate sense of responsibility that many medical professionals feel following avoidable error, and motivating medical professionals to report errors.

KW - blame

KW - liability

KW - medical ethics

KW - professional ethics

KW - Responsibility

U2 - 10.1111/japp.12433

DO - 10.1111/japp.12433

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85084422119

VL - 37

SP - 646

EP - 660

JO - Journal of Applied Philosophy

JF - Journal of Applied Philosophy

SN - 0264-3758

IS - 4

ER -