The Metaethics of Nursing Codes of Ethics and Conduct

Nursing codes of ethics and conduct are features of professional practice across the world, and in the UK, the regulator has recently consulted on and published a new code. Initially part of a professionalising agenda, nursing codes have recently come to represent a managerialist and disciplinary agenda and nursing can no longer be regarded as a self-regulating profession.This paper argues that codes of ethics and codes of conduct are significantly different in form and function similar to the difference between ethics and law in everyday life. Some codes successfully integrate these two functions within the same document, while others, principally the UK Code, conflate them resulting in an ambiguous document unable to fulfil its functions effectively. The paper analyses the differences between ethical- codes and conduct-codes by discussing titles, authorship, level, scope for disagreement, consequences of transgression, language and finally and possibly most importantly agent-centeredness. It is argued that conduct codes cannot require nurses to be compassionate because compassion involves an emotional response. The concept of kindness provides a plausible alternative for conduct-codes as it is possible to understand it solely in terms of acts. But if kindness is required in conduct-codes, investigation and possible censure follows from its absence. Using examples it is argued that there are at last five possible accounts of the absence of kindness. As well as being potentially problematic for disciplinary panels, difficulty in understanding the features of blameworthy absence of kindness may challenge UK nurses who, following a recently introduced revalidation procedure, are required to reflect on their practice in relation to The Code. It is concluded that closer attention to metaethical concerns by code writers will better support the functions of their issuing organisations

The SUrvey for Pulsars and Extragalactic Radio Bursts – II. New FRB discoveries and their follow-up

We report the discovery of four Fast Radio Bursts (FRBs) in the ongoing SUrvey for Pulsars and Extragalactic Radio Bursts at the Parkes Radio Telescope: FRBs 150610, 151206, 151230 and 160102. Our real-time discoveries have enabled us to conduct extensive, rapid multimessenger follow-up at 12 major facilities sensitive to radio, optical, X-ray, gamma-ray photons and neutrinos on time-scales ranging from an hour to a few months post-burst. No counterparts to the FRBs were found and we provide upper limits on afterglow luminosities. None of the FRBs were seen to repeat. Formal fits to all FRBs show hints of scattering while their intrinsic widths are unresolved in time. FRB 151206 is at low Galactic latitude, FRB 151230 shows a sharp spectral cut-off, and FRB 160102 has the highest dispersion measure (DM = 2596.1 ± 0.3 pc cm−3) detected to date. Three of the FRBs have high dispersion measures (DM > 1500 pc cm−3), favouring a scenario where the DM is dominated by contributions from the intergalactic medium. The slope of the Parkes FRB source counts distribution with fluences >2 Jy ms is α=−2.2+0.6−1.2 and still consistent with a Euclidean distribution (α = −3/2). We also find that the all-sky rate is 1.7+1.5−0.9×103 FRBs/(4π sr)/day above ∼2Jyms and there is currently no strong evidence for a latitude-dependent FRB sky rate