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