Vol X, Issue 1 Date of Publication: February 06, 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20529/IJME.2024.075

Views
, PDF Downloads:

LETTER


Customised honesty: A new paradigm in ethical behaviour

Abdul Sattar Khan

Published online first on November 15, 2024. DOI:10.20529/IJME.2024.075

Keywords: honesty, ethical behaviour, medical ethics

In an era where integrity is crucial, but under threat, the concept of “customised honesty” emerges as a nuanced approach to ethical behaviour. Unlike the traditional understanding of honesty, which adheres strictly to absolute truths, customised honesty adapts to the context, emphasising transparency and trust while considering situational dynamics. This approach fosters deeper relationships and communication that is more effective by balancing truthfulness with empathy and understanding.

Customised honesty revolves around balancing sensitivity and authenticity, tailoring communication to be truthful while respecting individual differences. This concept is grounded in various philosophies, frameworks, and theories. For example, relational dialectics theory (RDT) [1] examines the balancing of tact and honesty to maintain relationship integrity, while communication accommodation theory (CAT) [2] emphasises the adapting of communication styles to align with others’ preferences, considering their emotional state and cultural background. Emotional intelligence (EI) [3] focuses on managing emotions to communicate honestly and empathetically, and ethical relativism (ER) [4] suggests adapting truthfulness to fit contextual and cultural norms. Lastly, person-centered communication (PCC) [5] defines “customised honesty as delivering truthful messages tailored to the recipient’s specific context to ensure clarity and minimise discomfort”.

In practice, customised honesty would involve being truthful while carefully considering how the message is conveyed, ensuring it is appropriate and sensitive to the recipient’s circumstances and needs. For instance, in healthcare, customised honesty can enhance patient trust by ensuring information is conveyed compassionately and clearly, tailored to individual needs. In literature [5, 6], it was found that healthcare professionals who adapted their communication to the emotional and informational needs of patients were more successful in building trust and ensuring patient satisfaction. Similarly, in education, customised honesty encourages students to engage truthfully while respecting their personal journeys and challenges. The literature [4, 7] highlighted that when educators approach honesty with empathy, students are more likely to be honest about their difficulties, fostering a supportive learning environment.

However, the flexibility inherent in customised honesty demands a robust ethical framework to prevent manipulation or deceit. It requires individuals to possess a strong moral compass and the ability to discern when and how to adapt their honesty appropriately. The subjective nature of customised honesty can lead to ethical ambiguity, where the distinction between honesty and deception becomes blurred [8]. This ambiguity can be particularly dangerous in professional settings, where critical information might be withheld under the guise of protecting others’ feelings, potentially resulting in serious consequences.

Furthermore, the reliance on individual judgement to determine the appropriate level of honesty can be problematic. Without clear ethical guidelines, there is a risk that customised honesty will be used to rationalise dishonesty, eroding moral standards and accountability. There is a need for clear ethical boundaries and a culture of integrity to ensure that customised honesty is not misused. Inconsistent application of this approach can lead to confusion and conflict, undermining trust rather than building it [9].

Establishing clear ethical boundaries and promoting a culture of integrity are essential to prevent the potential misuse of this nuanced approach, which represents a sophisticated evolution in ethical behaviour, promoting integrity while accommodating the complexities of human interactions. It encourages us to strive for honesty that not only adheres to factual accuracy but also respects the emotional and situational context, paving the way for more meaningful and trustworthy relationships. While this approach has its benefits, including fostering empathy and situational awareness, it also carries significant risks that must be carefully managed to maintain ethical standards and public trust.


Abdul Sattar Khan ([email protected]), Family & Community Medicine Department, College of Medicine, King Faisal University, SAUDI ARABIA

To cite: Khan Sattar Abdul. Customised honesty: A new paradigm in ethical behaviour. Indian J Med Ethics. 2025 Jan-Mar; 10(1) NS:76-77. DOI:10.20529/IJME.2024.075

Published online first: November 15, 2024

Conflict of interest: None to declare.         Funding: None.

Copyright and license

©Indian Journal of Medical Ethics 2024: Open Access and Distributed under the Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits only noncommercial and non-modified sharing in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.


References

  1. Halliwell D. Extending relational dialectics theory: Exploring new avenues of research. Ann Int Commun Assoc. 2015 Jan 1;39(1):67-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2015.11679172
  2. Zhang YB, Giles H. Communication accommodation theory. The International Encyclopedia of Intercultural Communication. 2018;1:95-108. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783665.ieicc0156
  3. LaFollette H. The truth in ethical relativism. J Soc Philos. 1991 Mar;22(1):146-54.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9833.1991.tb00027.x
  4. MacCann C, Roberts RD. New paradigms for assessing emotional intelligence: theory and data. Emotion. 2008 Aug;8(4):540. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012746
  5. Zoffmann V, Harder I, Kirkevold M. A person-centered communication and reflection model: sharing decision-making in chronic care. Qual Health Res. 2008 May;18(5):670-85.https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732307311008
  6. Park J, Kim SH, Kim JG. Effects of message framing and health literacy on intention to perform diabetes self-care: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020 Mar 1; 161:108043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108043
  7. Ussher JM, Parton C, Perz J. Need for information, honesty and respect: patient perspectives on health care professionals’ communication about cancer and fertility. Reprod Health. 2018 Dec;15:1-2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-017-0441-z
  8. Hastings W. Research and the ambiguity of reflexivity and ethical practice. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. 2010 Jul 1;31(3):307-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596301003786902
  9. Goodman B. Lying to ourselves: rationality, critical reflexivity, and the moral order as ‘structured agency’. Nurs Philos. 2016 Jul;17(3):211-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.12125
About the Authors
Abdul Sattar Khan ([email protected])
Family & Community Medicine Department,
College of Medicine, King Faisal University, SAUDI ARABIA

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Please restrict your comment preferably to 800 words
Comments are moderated. Approval can take up to 48 hours.

Help IJME keep its content free. You can support us from as little as Rs. 500 Make a Donation