Ethical Reasoning Used by Teachers of Children with Severe and Profound Intellectual Disabilities: A preliminary investigation

In a study of the ethical reasoning of teachers of children with severe and profound intellectual disabilities, the authors report on their findings from interviews with, and classroom observations of, five teachers of children in segregated classrooms. The teachers' responses to four ethical dilemmas were discussed and analysed for the types of reasoning that they used and for the presence of four principles often cited in normative ethics: justice, respect for autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence. Interview data also suggested the presence of some distinctive elements in the ethical discussion of the participants. The authors found that teachers gave almost exclusive consideration to individual student interests in their discussions of the dilemmas. Although justice played a significant role in their validation of their decisions, the governing principle in their argument seemed to be beneficence. Moral impasses have frequently arisen in discussions of the ethics of decisions regarding persons with severe and profound intellectual disabilities. The findings of this study are presented as an empirical contribution to that debate and as a mandate for further discussion.