How to work through an ethics case: four boxes and deliberation
- Procedure
An ethics case is worked through in order: first the clinical facts, then the patient's wishes, the values at stake and the options.
What it is
Two methods are most used to analyse a clinical ethics case. The four boxes (four topics) method of Jonsen, Siegler and Winslade reviews, in order, medical indications, patient preferences, quality of life and contextual features. Diego Gracia's deliberative method moves through three levels (facts, values and duties): it identifies the conflicting values, looks for the extreme and intermediate courses of action, chooses the optimal course and puts it through consistency tests. Both aim at a reasonable, prudent decision, not a single right answer.
What it must include
- The complete, well-checked clinical facts.
- The voice of the patient or their surrogate.
- The conflicting values, stated clearly.
- The options considered and the reason for the one chosen.
- The entry in the medical record.
How it is done
- Present the case: the clinical history, family details and context.
- Clarify the clinical facts: diagnosis, prognosis, options and their risks (medical indications).
- Learn the patient's preferences and capacity; if they cannot decide, who represents them.
- Assess quality of life as the patient sees it, taking care not to impose the team's view.
- Review the context: family, resources, legal and institutional rules, conflicts of interest.
- Name the moral problem and the values that clash.
- Look for the extreme courses of action, then all the intermediate ones.
- Choose the optimal course: the one that best respects the conflicting values.
- Put the decision through the tests of legality, publicity and time, and write it down.
In clinical practice
- Clinical ethics committees use these methods to give recommendations, not orders.
- Thinking of intermediate courses avoids false dilemmas («all or nothing»).
- In a case conference, presenting the facts first avoids arguing about values on wrong data.
Common mistakes
- Skipping the facts and going straight to opinions.
- Reducing the case to a dilemma between two extremes.
- Leaving the patient or family out of the deliberation about values.
- Treating the order of the boxes as a ranking of importance.
Test yourself
Think of the answer, then tap the question to see it.
What are the four boxes of the Jonsen, Siegler and Winslade method?
Medical indications, patient preferences, quality of life and contextual features.
Which three levels does Gracia's deliberative method move through?
Facts, values and duties.
What is the optimal course of action in deliberation?
The one that best respects the conflicting values; it is usually a combination of intermediate courses, not one of the extremes.
Which consistency tests are applied to the final decision?
Legality (is it legal?), publicity (would you defend it in public?) and time (would you decide the same after some hours or days?).
Connections
Educational content on ethics and health law; not legal advice. Laws and case law change: each page links the official text and says when it was last checked. For a real case, read the text in force and ask a lawyer or the medical ethics tribunal.
Sources: Introduction to Clinical Ethics (the four topics method) (University of Washington, Department of Bioethics & Humanities, 2018); ¿Qué es la deliberación en clínica? (Comprender los cuidados paliativos) (Sociedad Española de Cuidados Paliativos (SECPAL), 2022).
Spotted a mistake?We are always improving for the community. Tell us what is wrong and our team will review it.Report a mistake
Representative model, for educational purposes only.