At Southampton Medical School students in the third year of the course (the first clinical year) spend one morning a week in general practice. Discussion of patients' problems with students often encompasses ethical issues, and for some time we have been aware of our inability to provide any clear frame? work for an informed debate. Our students get some formal teaching in ethics, but not until the second clinical year, and we thought that this arrangement missed the opportunity of tackling the problems when they have most relevance. As in other medical schools, the students already have a full timetable so that inserting extra sessions presents problems. Nevertheless, the third year general practice programme incorporates seven sessions in seminars in the department of primary medical care, when there are eight to 12 students in a group. We thought that part of this time could be devoted to a discussion of ethical matters, intending that students should consider the implications of clinical decisions?and it is considerably easier to encourage critical thinking in an interacting group than in a set lecture. Against that background, a chance meeting between the head of our department and Ian Kennedy, professor of medical law and ethics at King's College, London, led to a plan for five experimental sessions during the academic year 1982-3. Each student was asked to read some preliminary material. One article enumerated the fundamental principles of medical ethics, showing how they are identical both to those in general ethics and to principles identified by philosophers in antiquity.1 The second was a short extract from a book on medical ethics which discussed the nature of moral argument, showing how moral statements may be rationally defended or questioned with reference to ultimate beliefs.2 Finally, there was a published case presentation concerning a 76 year old woman admitted to hospital after a stroke. She suffered from maturity onset diabetes, controlled by tablets, and mitral valve disease and atrial fibrillation, for which she took anticoagulants. The article was in the form of a students' teaching session, where the discussion dealt with which treatments should or might be withheld, and how such questions should be answered for an individual.3 We aimed at using the first seminar to discuss general principles as they exist in all social life as well as in medicine, in terms both of their application and of their exceptions. The second seminar would then be devoted to discussing clinical cases brought by students, analysing them with reference to general principles and ensuring that the conclusions could be applied generally. As this was planned as an experiment, and as another development was being planned for assessment of the third year general practice course as a whole, we undertook no formal assessment of these seminars. What follows is the collective opinion of the teachers who took part, supported by videotapes of two sessions.