Moral Complicity

In searching the Internet for medical-oriented ethics organizations, I found the website for the American Academy of Medical Ethics (AAME). AAME's mission: "...to promote the interests of medical educators, medical practitioners and scientists, and to protect and promote the historic values that have provided the long-standing foundation for western medical care".

On AAME's website, I found the following article on moral complicity: http://cbhd.org/content/addressing-issues-moral-complicity-when-where-why-and-other-questions. The article poses many interesting questions that I'm not sure how to respond to. For example, should physicians take advantage of findings from research that they know was obtained under unethical conditions but will help their patients? The author, Robert Orr, MD defines moral complicity by using this example: Does person B (in this case the physician who uses the data) have any moral culpability by associating with the actions of person A (in this case the person who conducted the unethical research)?

Timing is important in determining moral complicity. If someone knows ahead of time that an unethical act is about to occur that they will later benefit from and they facilitate the unethical act in happening, they are morally complicit. Another factor in deciding if a situation is morally complicit is proximity. Orr discusses the example of someone who washes the windows of a medical office where abortions are performed. Wouldn't this person be less complicit than the doctor who actually performs the procedures? In all, Orr identifies 5 factors that should be examined to determine if a situation is morally complicit.

This article made me wonder how moral complicity coincides with, or differs from ethics? Are they the same?