Document Type
Article
Publication Title
Vanderbilt Law Review
Publication Date
Fall 2009
ISSN
0042-2533
Page Number
461
Keywords
social change, literature and society, sociological jurisprudence
Disciplines
Health Law and Policy | Law
Abstract
The empirical literature exploring lawyers and their moral decision making is limited despite the “crisis” of unethical and unprofessional behavior in the bar that has been well documented for over a decade. In particular we are unaware of any empirical studies that investigate the moral landscape of the health lawyer’s practice. In an effort to address this gap in the literature, an interdisciplinary team of researchers at Vanderbilt University designed an empirical study to gather preliminary evidence regarding the moral reasoning of health care attorneys. The primary research question was how health lawyers respond when they encounter ethical or moral dilemmas in their practice for which the law fails to offer a bright-line solution. In exploring this question, we sought to understand better what motivations or influences guide action when health lawyers confront ethical quandaries, and whether there are specific differences, e.g., gender, experience, or religiosity, that are associated with specific responses to situations testing ethical or moral boundaries. In Part I we discuss the relevant background literature. Our methodology is presented in Part II. We report results in Part III and discuss relevant findings in Part IV. We offer our concluding thoughts in Part V.
Recommended Citation
Ellen Wright Clayton, Joshua E. Perry, Ilene N. Moore, Bruce Barry, and Amanda R. Carrico,
The Ethical Health Lawyer: An Empirical Assessment of Moral Decision Making, 37 Vanderbilt Law Review. 461
(2009)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications/1681