What is it about?
In this article, a rationale for how a person-centered approach may contribute to a constructive practice of social ethics is discussed. As an exemplar of social ethics, I refer to the clinical, moral and political action taken in October 2015 by approximately 400 medical staff at a large public hospital in Australia.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Political action by medical/health professionals , prompted by a perceived threat to their duty of care for a discriminated minority group (of persons seeking asylum in Australia), raises several important issues concerning the practice of social ethics. I discuss Kant’s emphasis upon the regulatory functions of an autonomous will, and Carl Rogers’ focus on the facilitative conditions for enhancing the innate tendency of individuals and groups to organize, develop and co-exist constructively.
Perspectives
We need to be wary of quick formulaic solutions in a goal- and appearance-oriented society, and we should be prepared to endure the often slower and more difficult process of exploring different viewpoints and possibilities by promoting a climate of social inclusion and social empathy. Asylum seekers ought to be included in the discourse of a “fundamental We” instead of being treated as outsiders.
Dr Ross Crisp
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The person-centered approach and social ethics: a cautionary tale concerning persons seeking asylum in Australia, Person-Centered & Experiential Psychotherapies, May 2017, Taylor & Francis,
DOI: 10.1080/14779757.2017.1323667.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
