의료윤리 의사결정 방법론으로써 결의론의 가능성*

In this article casuistical deliberation is explained and examined in regards to whether or not it is suitable for clinical ethics deliberation. Casuistry is the analysis of moral issues using reasoning based on paradigms and analogies. Such case-based reasoning leads to the formation of expert opinions about moral obligations that are general but not universal or invariable. Casuists try to give guidance in cases in which no clear ethical principles can be applied and to categorize cases into paradigms and maxims. This article provides a casuistical analysis of a clinical case and argues that casuistical deliberation is an effective means of giving guidance on clinical ethics to clients.