Skip to main content

Table 2 Virtue Continua

From: Using practical wisdom to facilitate ethical decision-making: a major empirical study of phronesis in the decision narratives of doctors

Virtue (V.)

POLE1(excess)

MEAN

POLE2 (deficiency)

1

Doctor decides

Negotiation

Patient decides

2

ALL get treatment

Justice/Fairness

Select few get treated

3

Overly trusted

Trustworthiness/(including maintaining confidentiality)

No trust

4

Constant litigation worry

Lawfulness

Ignore legal constraints

5

Constantly seeks Guidance from peers and/or professional bodies

Collaboration (Making Collaborative Decisions/Seek guidance)

Self –guided/Does not consult

6

Use own values and beliefs

Cultural competence

Go with patient’s values and beliefs only

7

Too involved (Over emotional)

Emotional Intelligence (including Interpersonal Communication)

Distant/Aloof

8

Treat at all cost

Awareness of limits to treatments

Limited consideration of treatment options

9

Constant mentoring/overly directive

Mentorship (and being an approachable mentor)

No interest in mentorship

10

Trying to cater to all aspects – Arts/humanities science, spiritual and physical

Balanced approach

Just one approach—e.g. science/clinical only

11

Over-analytical (Navel gazing)

Reflexive

Never reflect

12

Foolhardy risk taker

Courage (to speak out and act)

Cowardice (Avoids conflict)

13

Thinking they are bullet proof

Resilience

Avoidance of any stress

14

Obsessed with finances/resources

Resource awareness

No consideration of resources

15

Seen it all/know it all/can deal with anything

Phronesis

Applies purely theory or just follows guidelines