What ties together competing ethical principles in principle-based ethics?

In principle-based ethics, the framework is built around multiple ethical principles that may sometimes conflict with one another, such as autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. The resolution of these conflicts is often guided by duties and obligations, which serve as a foundational element in balancing and integrating the competing principles. This means that when ethical dilemmas arise, the duties and obligations that the clinician has to the patient, family, and society can help to clarify which principles should take precedence or how they can be harmonized.

For instance, if a patient's autonomy (the right to make their own decisions) conflicts with the principle of beneficence (the obligation to do good), understanding the duties involved—such as the responsibility to respect the patient’s choices while also providing beneficial recommendations—can guide the decision-making process. Additionally, understanding obligations might include considering informed consent, confidentiality, and the potential impacts of the decision on the patient's health and well-being.

The other options do not align with the concept of integrating competing ethical principles in the same way. Values, inheritance patterns, or specific criteria in genetic literature do not inherently provide a method for reconciling ethical dilemmas, which is the key function of duties and obligations within principle-based ethics