Skip to main content

The History of Surgical Ethics

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Surgical Ethics

Abstract

The origin of surgical ethics has been ambiguous. Some claim it dates back to the ancient Greeks, but most believe it began at least in part with Gregory and Percival who are credited as the founders of modern medical ethics. Although medical and surgical ethics share common fundamental principles, surgical ethics evolved distinctly from medical ethics due to the unique nature of surgery and the surgeon-patient relationship. The history of surgery as a profession has revolved around ethical issues unique to surgery such as fee splitting, itinerant surgery, informed consent, solid organ transplantation, and surgical innovation. As the field of surgery continues to advance, society will rely on surgeons to guide the future of surgical ethics to ensure that trust is upheld and the focus remains on the patient.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Jonsen A. A short history of medical ethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mininberg D. In: Allen JP, editor. The legacy of ancient Egyptian medicine. The art of medicine in ancient Egypt. New York: Metropolitan Museum Press; 2005. p. 13–5.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Namm JP, Siegler M, Brander C, Kim TY, Lowe C, Angelos P. History and evolution of surgical ethics: John Gregory to the twenty-first century. World J Surg. 2014;38(7):1568–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. McCullough L. The nature and limits of the Physician’s professional responsibilities: surgical ethics, matters of conscience, and managed care. Medicine and Philosophy. 2004;29(1):3–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Jones JW, MacCullough LB, Richman BW. The ethics of surgical practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Beauchamp T, Faden RR. History of informed consent Reich WT encyclopedia of bioethics ed. New York, NY: Free Press; 1978. p. 1233.

    Google Scholar 

  7. McCullough L. John Gregory and the invention of professional medical ethics and the profession of medicine. Dordrect: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bastron D, McCullough L. What goes around, comes around: John Gregory, MD, and the profession of medicine. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2007;20:18–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Percival T. Medical ethics. New York, NY: Leslie B Adams; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Thomas Percival (1740--1804). Codifier of Medical Ethics. JAMA. 1965;194(12):1319–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Inglis-Arkell E. The legend of the surgery with the 300% mortality rate: Science Direct; 2015 [cited 2017]. Available from: https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-legend-of-the-surgery-with-the-300-mortality-rate-1684894531.

  12. Imber G. Genius on the edge. New York, NY: Kaplan Publishing; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rise G. Modern surgery in hospitals: development of anesthesia and antisepsis. Mending bodies, saving souls a history of hospitals. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1888. p. 339–98.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Davis L. Fellowship of surgeons: a history of the American College of Surgeons. Chicago, Ill: American College of Surgeons; 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rosenberg C. The Care of Strangers: the Rise of America’s hospital system. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Risse G. Mending Bodies, Saving souls: a history of hospitals. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Angelos P. The right choice? Surgical ethics and the history of surgery. [cited 2017 11/8]. Available from: http://www.mdedge.com/acssurgerynews/article/141648/practice-management/right-choice-surgical-ethics-and-history-surgery.

  18. Jones J, McCullough L, Richman B. Informed consent: it’s not just signing a form. Thorac Surg Clin. 2005;15(4):451–60.. v

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. McKneally M, Martin D. An entrustment model of consent for surgical treatment of life-threatening illness: perspective of patients requiring esophagectomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2000;120(2):264–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Namm J, Siegler M, Angelos P. What is distinctive about surgical ethics. In: Ferreres A, Angelos P, Singer A, editors. Ethical issues in Surgical Care. Chicago: American College of Surgeons; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schloendorff V. Society of New York Hospital. 105 NE 92. New York; 1914.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of biomedical ethics. 7th ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Brunicardi F, Anderson DK, Billiar TR, et al. Schwartz’s principles of surgery. 10th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Moore F, et al. Surgical ethics and the dying patient. Bull Am Coll Surg. 1975;60(6):12–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Barclay WR. Guidelines for the Determination of Death. JAMA. 1981;246(19):2194.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Keely G, Gorsuch AM, McCabe JM, et al. Uniform determination of death act. Chicago, IL: National Conference of Commissioners On Uniform State Laws; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Davis C, Delmonico F. Living-donor kidney transplantation: a review of the current practices for the live donor. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005;16(7):2098–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Singer P, Sigler M, Whitington P. Ethics of liver transplantation with living donors. N Engl J Med. 1989;321:620–2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim P, Testa G. Living donor liver transplantation in the USA. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr. 2016;5(2):133–40.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Nadalin S, Bockhorn M, Malago M, et al. Living donor liver transplantation. HPB (Oxford). 2006;8(1):10–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Michael L. Evidence-based medicine, cost containment, care effectiveness: Is it a new trilogy aimed at transforming the surgical mystique or the reality of double standards? Acta Chir Belg. 2001;101:95–100.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Reitsman A, Moreno JD. Ethical regulations for innovative surgery: the last frontier. J Am Coll Surg. 2002;194:792–801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. AM R, MJ D. Ethical regulations for innovative surgery: the last frontier? J Am Coll Surg. 2002;194(6):792–801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Reynolds W. The first laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Profiles in Laparoscopy. 2001;5(1):89–94.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Bernard H, Hartman TW. Complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg. 1993;165:533–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. The Southern Surgeons Club MM, Bennett C. The learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg. 1992;170(1):55–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Jones J, McCullough L, Richman B. The ethics of innovative surgical approaches for well-established procedures. J Vasc Surg. 2004;40(1):199–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. McKneally M, Daar A. Introducing new technologies: protecting subjects of surgical innovation and research. World J Surg. 2003;27(8):930–4.. discussion 4-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Biffl W, Spain D, Reitsma A, et al. Responsible development and application of surgical innovations: a position statement of the Society of University Surgeons. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206(6):1204–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Angelos P. Orlo Clark and the rise of surgical ethics. World J Surg. 2009;33(3):372–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Little M. The fivefold root of an ethics of surgery. Bioethics. 2002;16(3):183–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Angelos P. Surgical ethics and the challenge of surgical innovation. Am J Surg. 2014;208(6):881–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bosk C. Forgive and remember. 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 2003.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Suggested Literature

  • Angelos P. Orlo Clark and the risk of surgical ethics. 2009; 50(3): 99–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litle M. The fivefold root of surgical ethics. 2002; 16(3): 183–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nahrwold DL, Kernahan PJ. A century of surgeons and surgery: the American College of Surgeons 1913–2012. Chicago: American College of Surgeons; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Namm, et al. History and evolution of surgical ethics: from John Gregory to the 21st century. World J Surg. 2014;38(7):1568–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jukes P. Namm .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Glossary

Nonmaleficence

A fundamental principle of bioethics meaning first do no harm. It is based from the writings of Hippocrates primum non nocere.

Fee splitting

The practice of splitting the price the patient paid for surgery. It incentivized both the referring physician and the surgeon. It was addressed when ACS was first established as an unethical practice.

Itinerant surgery

A common practice in the early twentieth century when a surgeon would come at the request of a primary care physician and perform a surgery without ever seeing the patient first. Postoperative care was also left in the hands of the primary care physician. It was addressed as unethical practice, and surgeons were barred entrance into ACS fellowship if they were known to do this practice.

Reasonable person standard

Referring to the disclosure that accompanies the informed consent discussion. The reasonable person is the accepted form of disclosure meaning that the information disclosed should be in line with a hypothetical reasonable person.

Justice

One of the fundamental principles of bioethics. It is based on the idea fairness and equal treatment for all involved parties.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Namm, J.P., Krause, C.C. (2019). The History of Surgical Ethics. In: Ferreres, A. (eds) Surgical Ethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05964-4_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05964-4_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05963-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05964-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics