Since its appearance in 1803, Percival's Medical Ethics has been the dominant influence in Anglo-American medical ethics and the paradigmatic source for the first, and subsequent, Code of the American Medical Association. Its influence is exceeded only by the Oath and Deontological books of the Hippocratic Corpus. Yet, the moral philosophy underlying Percival's Medical Ethics has not been well studied, and, indeed, seems misunderstood in the standard account given by most contemporary commentators.
In this article, I would like to offer some evidence contrary to the standard account that: (1) Percival's Code is mere etiquette and not ethics, (2) it lacks philosophical substance, and (3) it perpetuates a spirit of paternalistic condescension totally unsuited to our democratic times.
Against this view I will suggest that (1) Percival was a better moral philosopher than credited, (2) beneath the surface of professional decorum there is a sound and definable moral theory, and
Pellegrino ED. Percival's Medical Ethics: The Moral Philosophy of an 18th-Century English Gentleman. Arch Intern Med. 1986;146(11):2265–2269. doi:10.1001/archinte.1986.00360230211030
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: