» Articles » PMID: 22042598

The Principle of Proportionality Revisited: Interpretations and Applications

Overview
Specialty Medical Ethics
Date 2011 Nov 2
PMID 22042598
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The principle of proportionality is used in many different contexts. Some of these uses and contexts are first briefly indicated. This paper focusses on the use of this principle as a moral principle. I argue that under certain conditions the principle of proportionality is helpful as a guide in decision-making. But it needs to be clarified and to be used with some flexibility as a context-dependent principle. Several interpretations of the principle are distinguished, using three conditions as a starting point: importance of objective, relevance of means, and most favourable option. The principle is then tested against an example, which suggests that a fourth condition, focusing on non-excessiveness, needs to be added. I will distinguish between three main interpretations of the principle, some primarily with uses in research ethics, others with uses in other areas of bioethics, for instance in comparisons of therapeutic means and ends. The relations between the principle of proportionality and the precautionary principle are explored in the following section. It is concluded that the principles are different and may even clash. In the next section the principle of proportionality is applied to some medical examples drawn from research ethics and bioethics. In concluding, the status of the principle of proportionality as a moral principle is discussed. What has been achieved so far and what remains to be done is finally summarized.

Citing Articles

Prudent Physician Anger in Patient-Physician Interactions.

Buetow S Health Care Anal. 2025; 33(1):35-51.

PMID: 39751782 DOI: 10.1007/s10728-024-00506-x.


COVID-19 ethics: unique aspects and a review as of early 2024.

Shandera W Monash Bioeth Rev. 2024; 42(1):55-86.

PMID: 39003388 PMC: 11368997. DOI: 10.1007/s40592-024-00199-x.


Health communication in and out of public health emergencies: to persuade or to inform?.

Oxman A, Fretheim A, Lewin S, Flottorp S, Glenton C, Helleve A Health Res Policy Syst. 2022; 20(1):28.

PMID: 35248064 PMC: 8897761. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-022-00828-z.


Wicked problems and proportionality: Is the lesser of two evils the best we can do?.

Makhdoum A, Tam D, Fremes S J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020; 161(2):e231-e232.

PMID: 33268115 PMC: 7580685. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.06.128.


Forensic genealogy, bioethics and the Golden State Killer case.

Wickenheiser R Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2020; 1:114-125.

PMID: 32411963 PMC: 7219171. DOI: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2019.07.003.


References
1.
Hofmann B . The concept of disease--vague, complex, or just indefinable?. Med Health Care Philos. 2009; 13(1):3-10. DOI: 10.1007/s11019-009-9198-7. View

2.
Holm S, Harris J . Precautionary principle stifles discovery. Nature. 1999; 400(6743):398. DOI: 10.1038/22626. View

3.
Peterson M . Should the precautionary principle guide our actions or our beliefs?. J Med Ethics. 2007; 33(1):5-10. PMC: 2598072. DOI: 10.1136/jme.2005.015495. View

4.
Jansen L, Sulmasy D . Proportionality, terminal suffering and the restorative goals of medicine. Theor Med Bioeth. 2003; 23(4-5):321-37. DOI: 10.1023/a:1021209706566. View

5.
Forge J . Proportionality, just war theory and weapons innovation. Sci Eng Ethics. 2008; 15(1):25-38. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-008-9088-z. View