Credentialization or Critique? Neoliberal Ideology and the Fate of the Ethical Voice

Abstract

In this commentary we respond to White, Jankowski, andShelton’s (2014) article about structuring a written exam-ination to assess what the American Society for Bioethicsand Humanities (ASBH) calls health care ethics consul-tation “core knowledge competencies” (ASBH 2011). Wechallenge the need for such tests and question what pur-posetheyservesavetofurtheradvanceaneoliberalversionofethics—anethicscolonizedbythecorporatistideologyof“entrepreneurialfreedomsandskillswithinaninstitutionalframework”(Harvey2005,2).Focusingonhealthcareethicsconsultants,theauthorsproposeacredentializingexamina-tion to measure ethical “core competencies” in a mannerthat would be “statistically reliable” and based on “fac-tual information, which is noncontroversial.” They furtherspeculate on “business plan development” and the “bud-getary implications” of such minutiae as multiple-choiceversus essay questions, and the outsourced costs of “psy-chometric analysis and review.” The article itself gets tan-gled in its own web of proceduralism and managerialism,ignoring the substantive ethical stakes of the litigious creeptoward the credentialization and professionalization ofbioethics.If bioethics were subject to a professional body anda standardized examination, the terms of ethical de-liberation and decision making would be sharply cir-cumscribed. “Factual” terms and procedurally verifiablepractices—arbitrarily defined—would determine in ad-vancewhatkindsofquestionscouldbeasked,inwhatway,by whom, and of whom. And under ever-increasing pres-sure to “vocationalize” curricula, educational institutionswouldaltertheirinstructionto“teachtothetest.”Aprofes-