L ethics. Two extreme views clash those represented by supporters of “code ethics” and those represented by the adherents of “no-code ethics” . Opponents with the codification of ethics  commonly formulate three accusation claims: deontologism, conventionalism and opportunism. The first one is primarily based around the statement that globe on the values and duties will not ever be transformed into neat manual in the moral conduct. The code of ethics reduces the issue with the responsibility towards the obedience to norms. Evaluation criterion is established as carrying out one’s duties, in lieu of individual reflection or examination of one’s conscience. The second claim comes out in the statement that the morality is one thing independent of the convention and contract, and specialist ethics is inseparably connected with it. Creating a code causes the problem ofeJIFCC2014Vol25No2pp199-Elbieta Puacz, Waldemar Glusiec, Barbara Madej-Czerwonka Polish Code of Ethics of a Health-related Laboratory Specialistestablishing requirements in experienced ethics: who and by what criteria is supposed to appoint these norms A sign of opportunistic character ascribed to supporters of codes is expediential dimension of these documents. Elaborating codes normally serves a precise occupational group rather than develops a broad and impartial moral reflection. Within a response to accusations of supporters of “no-code ethics” opposite arguments are place forward. Firstly, they underline that obedience towards the code is in no way discharging a person from moral responsibility. Secondly, the norm integrated inside the code, irrespective from the convention in which it was made, is furthermore sensitizing the employee for the moral dimension of action to which this norm refers to. Thirdly, codes of ethics pretty generally appeal to anti-pragmatic category of dignity. It can be difficult to accuse these documents of exclusively financial character and to assign to them only praxeological PF-915275 chemical information function. It is actually feasible also to dismiss the accusation of your opportunism by filling the elementary requirement put prior to each code of ethics, i.e. guarding the social welfare. Correct concern in regards to the society as a whole protects from the scenario in which the business enterprise of a offered occupational group will become the only grounds for producing the code . Inside the light of this discussion it is achievable to express two considerable conclusions. It really is hard to visualize experienced ethics without the need of clearly defined principles and duties and those are most generally expressed within the kind of norms from the code. This will not imply even though that the complete location of experienced ethics is reduced and is contained in these documents. Art. 27 of CEMLS accurately emphasizes it: “this Code of Ethics of a Health-related Laboratory Specialist may be the collection of fundamental ethical standards that need to be followed by every representative of the profession” . Secondly, codes should really not become a “legalization of ethics”. Contrarily, the point is Pagethat norms integrated in codes are rooted in the value systems with the neighborhood. This rooting of CEMLS is explained in the preamble: ,,The Code of Ethics in the Health-related Laboratory Specialist is grounded in frequently PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21345631 accepted ethical requirements at the same time because the principles originating in the expert tradition” . Concern about “legalization of ethics” in CEMLS is dispelled by Art. 28-29: ,,This Code of Ethics of a Medical Laboratory Specialist is definitely the supply of moral guidelines and does not replace the approach of a.