Issue 10:1 Spring-Summer 2003
Special
Issue -- Fiduciary Ethics
Duties of Gratitude
Samuel V. Bruton
Department of Philosophy and
Religion
University of Southern
Mississippi
Hattiesburg, MS
Samuel.Bruton@usm.edu
Abstract: This
paper is a response to a recent article by Christopher Wellman in which Wellman
argues that gratitude is better understood as a virtue
rather than a source of moral obligations. First, I offer several examples
intended to dispute his claim that gratitude does not impose duties. Second, I
provide my own reasons for thinking that deontic
notions alone cannot capture the moral significance of gratitude.
Wellman=s mistake is attributable to an overly narrow conception
of duty that his argument presupposes. Finally, I consider the implications of
my analysis for fiduciary ethics generally given the indeterminacy of the
principle of gratitude.
Trust in
Strangers, Trust in Friends
Jessica Miller
Department of Philosophy
The Maples
University of Maine
jessica.miller@umit.maine.edu
Abstract: Recent
literature on trust commonly contains the claim that the trust
which characterizes intimate relationships is a different phenomenon
altogether from the trust that characterizes professional and other sorts of
non-intimate relationships. In this paper I argue that while there are important
differences among kinds of trust, an invidious distinction between trust in
strangers and trust in friends is not only unwarranted but it obscures the
fundamentally affective and relational base of all forms of interpersonal trust.
In this essay I construct an account of interpersonal
trust, which recognizes the similarities that pervade its different forms.
Without such a complex approach, we lose theoretical sight not only of key
features of trust, but of the relationship of trust to significant dimensions of
human existence.
Duties of Neighbors: Patriotism, Projects and Fiduciary
Bonds of Nearness
Thomas D. Kennedy
Department of Philosophy
Valparaiso University
Abstract: A
primary fiduciary bond, rarely examined, is that of neighbor. I distinguish
this bond from others that may overlap it, those of
fellow citizen or compatriot. I argue that the nature of moral identity and the
nature of moral formation require moral agents to acknowledge the fiduciary
duties of neighbor.
Representative
Democracy and the Public Trust
Evelyn Keyes, J.D.,
Ph.D.
Justice
1st Court of Appeals
Houston, TX
Abstract: The AIdea of Intrinsic Equality@ is central to democracy, but in what respects are
persons intrinsically equal, and what requirements, if any, does their equality
impose on a process for making collective decisions? This paper seeks to answer
that question with respect to our own representative democracy. It examines
three theories of collective decision-making that arguably characterize the
democratic process under the United States Constitution. It
concludes that, while all preserve the Idea of Intrinsic Equality in the
election of representatives and legislative voting, only the third theory,
Democratic Egalitarianism, which treats all like interests alike in promulgating
laws and preserves the fundamental liberties of all, both preserves the Idea of
Intrinsic Equality throughout the legislative process and fulfills the fiduciary
mandate that legislators legislate in the interests of the
people.
Democracy, Trust
and the Problem of >Dirty Hands=
Stephen de Wijze
Department of Government
University of Manchester
Manchester, England UK
dewijze@man.ac.uk
Abstract:
>Dirty hands= scenarios require politicians to commit moral violations
to achieve worthwhile goals. To mitigate the harm done to the
fiduciary relationship underlying a democratic society, I argue for the adoption
of two procedures: retrospective accountability and special oversight
committees. I also offer three criteria for a much-required political
ethic.
Ethics in the Board Room: Contracts or Fiduciary
Relationships?
Patricia C. Flynn RSM
St. Joseph=s College, Standish, Maine
Georgetown University, Washington,
DC
Abstract: Most
contemporary discussions of institutional ethics take contractual rather than
fiduciary relations as the model for describing moral responsibilities, leaving
institutional boards with few resources to support and critique their moral behavior. I argue that institutional fiduciary
relationships cannot be characterized as contracts, either in
fact or function. Each form
of relationship privileges a different set of behaviors and values that are far
from interchangeable.
Fiduciary Duty and
Socially Responsible Investing
Johann A.
Klaassen, Ph.D.
Assistant
Manager, Managed Account Programs
First
Affirmative Financial Network, LLC
johann@firstaffirmative.com
George R.
Gay, CFP7, CEO
First
Affirmative Financial Network, LLC
Abstract: Most
discussions of fiduciary duty focus on medical decision-making, but that is not
the only context in which the concept is important. Investment advisers have
fiduciary duties to their clients: in this essay, we address those duties. Many
advisers refuse to help their clients with >socially responsible= investment plans, for a variety of reasons, among which
are fiduciary concerns. We argue that the reasons generally given not to pursue
a religious, environmental, or social investment strategy are mistaken, and,
most importantly, that an investment adviser's fiduciary duties may be met while
providing such alternatives to clients.
Conflicts of
Interest in the Privatization of Child Welfare
Martin G.
Leever, Ph.D.
Department
of Philosophy
University
of Detroit Mercy
Detroit,
Michigan
E-mail: leevermg@udmercy.edu
Abstract: Due to
the enormous disparity of power in the child welfare professional-client
relationship, a high level of trust is necessary for this relationship to
achieve its intended benefits, including protecting, caring for, terminating
parental rights to, and finding appropriate adoptive homes for, abused and
neglected children. This paper first defines conflicts of interest as
necessarily including the exercise of judgment, and then argues that contractual
relationships between private child welfare agencies and public departments of
child welfare often betray their fiduciary responsibilities through conflicts of
interest inherent in these contracts, particularly as regarding incentives for
and against finding permanent homes for abused and neglected children. Finally,
I propose an evidence-based strategy to ameliorate conflicts of interest when
making permanent placement decisions for foster
children.
Open Adoption and
the Ethics of Disclosure to Children
Sarah-Vaughan Brakman
Director,
Ethics Program
Assistant
Professor of Philosophy
Villanova
University
Abstract: A
sustained analysis of the moral permissibility of withholding or of the
obligation to disclose information to an adopted child is lacking in the
literature on parental duties, disclosures, and adoption. These two sets of
questions raise issues that appear to fall within the parameters of the concepts
of stewardship and gratitude. I propose that adoptive parents are the stewards
of the information they receive concerning their child and I show how
stewardship and gratitude can aid adoptive parents as they negotiate the terrain
of disclosure.
Fiduciary Paradox
and Psychotherapy
Dennis E.
Skocz
Independent
Scholar
Abstract: In the
psychotherapist-patient relationship, the therapist-fiduciary must deal with
ambiguity, assume risks, and make decisions without final appeal to psychiatric
theory. Ambiguity regarding patient autonomy poses treatment paradoxes. Caregiving that aims at autonomy can end up undermining it.
Additionally, pursuit of autonomy can put the patient=s well-being at risk.
Autonomy Gone
Mad
Alfred I.
Tauber
Department
of Philosophy
Boston
University
745
Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215
Abstract:
Medicine=s fundamental moral philosophy is the responsibility of
caring for the ill, yet beneficence is not under the province of the law.
Indeed, fiduciary responsibilities of doctors are limited. Instead, American law is preoccupied with
protecting patient rights under the precept of patient autonomy, and
contemporary medical ethics is dominated by these
concerns. The extrapolation of autonomy rights from the political and judicial
culture to medicine is, under ordinary circumstance, non-problematic. However,
in instances of conflict, the dominance of autonomy reveals a hierarchy of
values determining patient care. To illustrate the moral calculus of balancing
competing principles, the ethical issues of involuntary treatment of psychotic
patients are considered, and alternatives to the moral reasoning currently
guiding the care of these individuals are offered to
better solve the dilemma of respecting patient autonomy while still fulfilling
the claims of physician responsibility.
Fiduciary
Decision-Making Using Comfort Care
Katharine
Kolcaba
University
of Akron College of Nursing
Akron,
OH
kolcaba@uakron.edu
Raymond J.
Kolcaba
Department
of Philosophy/Humanities
Cuyahoga
Community College
Cleveland,
OH
Abstract: Ethical
fiduciaries in health care lack sufficient criteria for making ethical
decisions. The authors introduce criteria from The Theory of Comfort as
developed in the nursing literature. According to the theory, comfort is based in observation, measurable, and represents a nearly
universal human need and interest. Use of the theory is
illustrated through three case studies.
Trust, Covert
Surveillance and Fiduciary Obligations
Wayne
Vaught, Ph.D.
Assistant
Professor of Philosophy and Medicine
University
of Missouri-Kansas City
Abstract: Health
professionals, by agreeing to provide care, accept a fiduciary role that entails
an obligation to preserve trust. We trust health professionals to be competent,
to promote patient interests, and to properly utilize
their discretionary power. While some health professionals argue that such
activities as secretly screening for drugs or sexually transmitted diseases are
necessary to fulfill their fiduciary obligations, these may actually constitute
a breach of trust. In this paper, I argue that, in the specific case of Munchausen=s Syndrome by Proxy, covert surveillance is ethically
justifiable and does not constitute a breach of trust and an abuse of the
fiduciary relationship.