Phenomenology, Saudi Arabia, and an argument for the standardization of clinical ethics consultation.

BACKGROUND The purpose of this study is to make a philosophical argument against the phenomenological critique of standardization in clinical ethics. We used the context of clinical ethics in Saudi Arabia to demonstrate the importance of credentialing clinical ethicists. METHODS Philosophical methods of argumentation and conceptual analysis were used. RESULTS We found the phenomenological critique of standardization to be flawed because it relies on a series of false dichotomies. CONCLUSIONS We concluded that the phenomenological framing of the credentialing debate relies upon two extreme views to be navigated between, not chosen among, in the credentialing of clinical ethicists.