Response—Corruption, Trust, and Professional Regulation

In their 2018 article in the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Little, Lipworth, and Kerridge unpack the concept of corruption and clarify the mechanisms that foster corruption and allow it to persist, noting that organizations are “corruptogenic.” To address the “so-what” question, I draw...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of bioethical inquiry 2022-03, Vol.19 (1), p.129-134
Main Author: Montgomery, Kathleen
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
19 Symposium: Little et al. 2018—Archeology of corruption
Ethics
Humans
Medical Law
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Organizations
Publishing
Scientific Misconduct
Symposium: Legacy of Miles Little
Theory of Medicine/Bioethics
Trust
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In their 2018 article in the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Little, Lipworth, and Kerridge unpack the concept of corruption and clarify the mechanisms that foster corruption and allow it to persist, noting that organizations are “corruptogenic.” To address the “so-what” question, I draw on research about trust and trustworthiness, emphasizing that a person’s well-being and sense of security require trust to be present at both the individual and organizational levels—which is not possible in an environment where corruption and misconduct prevail. I highlight similarities in Little et al.’s framing of corruption to the persistent problem of scientific misconduct in research and publishing. I acknowledge the challenges in stemming corruption in science and medicine and conclude with a discussion about the need to reinvigorate a web of stakeholders to actively engage in professional regulation.
ISSN:1176-7529
1872-4353
DOI:10.1007/s11673-021-10149-5