Unlocking the Voices of Patients with Severe Brain Injury

IF 2.6 4区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Neuroethics Pub Date : 2022-02-11 DOI:10.1007/s12152-022-09492-0
Andrew Peterson, Kevin Mintz, Adrian M. Owen
{"title":"Unlocking the Voices of Patients with Severe Brain Injury","authors":"Andrew Peterson, Kevin Mintz, Adrian M. Owen","doi":"10.1007/s12152-022-09492-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper critically examines whether patients with severe brain injury, who can only communicate through assistive neuroimaging technologies, may permissibly participate in medical decisions. We examine this issue in the context of a unique case study from the Brain and Mind Institute at the University of Western Ontario. First, we describe how the standard approach to medical decision making might problematically exclude patients with communication impairments secondary to severe brain injury. Second, we present a modified approach to medical decision making. We argue that this approach might warrant the inclusion of some patients with severe brain injury in low-stakes decisions, or to express preferences. Third, we present a model of supported decision making to address recalcitrant uncertainty. We conclude by suggesting that the modified approach to decision making and supported decision making might allow a patient with severe brain injury to participate in some medical decisions. Our analysis is provisional and has not yet been implemented in practice. Our discussion is intended to generate further debate on approaches to enhancing autonomy in patients with profound motor and cognitive impairments.</p>","PeriodicalId":49255,"journal":{"name":"Neuroethics","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-022-09492-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This paper critically examines whether patients with severe brain injury, who can only communicate through assistive neuroimaging technologies, may permissibly participate in medical decisions. We examine this issue in the context of a unique case study from the Brain and Mind Institute at the University of Western Ontario. First, we describe how the standard approach to medical decision making might problematically exclude patients with communication impairments secondary to severe brain injury. Second, we present a modified approach to medical decision making. We argue that this approach might warrant the inclusion of some patients with severe brain injury in low-stakes decisions, or to express preferences. Third, we present a model of supported decision making to address recalcitrant uncertainty. We conclude by suggesting that the modified approach to decision making and supported decision making might allow a patient with severe brain injury to participate in some medical decisions. Our analysis is provisional and has not yet been implemented in practice. Our discussion is intended to generate further debate on approaches to enhancing autonomy in patients with profound motor and cognitive impairments.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解开严重脑损伤患者的声音
这篇论文批判性地研究了严重脑损伤患者,谁只能通过辅助神经成像技术进行交流,是否可以允许参与医疗决策。我们在西安大略大学大脑与心理研究所的一个独特案例研究的背景下研究这个问题。首先,我们描述了医疗决策的标准方法如何排除继发于严重脑损伤的沟通障碍患者。其次,我们提出了一种改进的医疗决策方法。我们认为,这种方法可能保证在低风险决策中纳入一些严重脑损伤患者,或表达偏好。第三,我们提出了一个支持决策模型来解决顽固性不确定性。我们的结论是,改进的决策方法和支持决策可能允许严重脑损伤患者参与一些医疗决策。我们的分析是暂时的,还没有付诸实践。我们的讨论旨在进一步讨论如何提高严重运动和认知障碍患者的自主性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neuroethics
Neuroethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Neuroethics is an international, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to academic articles on the ethical, legal, political, social and philosophical questions provoked by research in the contemporary sciences of the mind and brain; especially, but not only, neuroscience, psychiatry and psychology. The journal publishes articles on questions raised by the sciences of the brain and mind, and on the ways in which the sciences of the brain and mind illuminate longstanding debates in ethics and philosophy.
期刊最新文献
Responding to existential distress at the end of life: Psychedelics and psychedelic experiences and/ as medicine Deep Brain Stimulation for Consciousness Disorders; Technical and Ethical Considerations Neurorights, Mental Privacy, and Mind Reading A Transformative Trip? Experiences of Psychedelic Use Neurotechnological Applications and the Protection of Mental Privacy: An Assessment of Risks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1