Blurred lines: Ethical challenges related to autonomy in home-based care.

IF 2.9 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Nursing Ethics Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-20 DOI:10.1177/09697330231215951
Cecilie Knagenhjelm Hertzberg, Anne Kari Tolo Heggestad, Morten Magelssen
{"title":"Blurred lines: Ethical challenges related to autonomy in home-based care.","authors":"Cecilie Knagenhjelm Hertzberg, Anne Kari Tolo Heggestad, Morten Magelssen","doi":"10.1177/09697330231215951","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Home-based care workers mainly work alone in the patient's home. They encounter a diverse patient population with complex health issues. This inevitably leads to several ethical challenges.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim is to gain insight into ethical challenges related to patient autonomy in home-based care and how home-based care staff handle such challenges.</p><p><strong>Research design: </strong>The study is based on a 9-month fieldwork, including participant observation and interviews in home-based care. Data were analysed with a thematic analysis approach.</p><p><strong>Participants and research context: </strong>The study took place within home-based care in three municipalities in Eastern Norway, with six staff members as key informants.</p><p><strong>Ethical considerations: </strong>The Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research evaluated the study. All participants were competent to consent and signed an informed consent form.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>A main challenge was that staff found it difficult to respect the patient's autonomy while at the same time practicing appropriate care. We found two main themes: Autonomy and risk in tension; and strategies to balance autonomy and risk. These were explicated in four sub-themes: Refusing and resisting care; when choosing to live at home becomes risky; sweet-talking and coaxing; and building trust over time. Staff's threshold for considering the use of coercion appeared to be high.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Arguably, home-based care staff need improved knowledge of coercion and the legislation regulating it. There is also a need for arenas for ethics reflection and building of competence in balancing ethical values in recurrent ethical problems.</p>","PeriodicalId":49729,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1156-1171"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11459861/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330231215951","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Home-based care workers mainly work alone in the patient's home. They encounter a diverse patient population with complex health issues. This inevitably leads to several ethical challenges.

Aim: The aim is to gain insight into ethical challenges related to patient autonomy in home-based care and how home-based care staff handle such challenges.

Research design: The study is based on a 9-month fieldwork, including participant observation and interviews in home-based care. Data were analysed with a thematic analysis approach.

Participants and research context: The study took place within home-based care in three municipalities in Eastern Norway, with six staff members as key informants.

Ethical considerations: The Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research evaluated the study. All participants were competent to consent and signed an informed consent form.

Findings: A main challenge was that staff found it difficult to respect the patient's autonomy while at the same time practicing appropriate care. We found two main themes: Autonomy and risk in tension; and strategies to balance autonomy and risk. These were explicated in four sub-themes: Refusing and resisting care; when choosing to live at home becomes risky; sweet-talking and coaxing; and building trust over time. Staff's threshold for considering the use of coercion appeared to be high.

Conclusions: Arguably, home-based care staff need improved knowledge of coercion and the legislation regulating it. There is also a need for arenas for ethics reflection and building of competence in balancing ethical values in recurrent ethical problems.

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
界限模糊:家庭护理中与自主权相关的伦理挑战。
背景:家庭护理工作者主要在病人家中单独工作。他们遇到的病人群体多种多样,健康问题错综复杂。目的:本研究旨在深入了解家庭护理中与病人自主权相关的伦理挑战,以及家庭护理人员如何应对这些挑战:研究基于为期 9 个月的实地调查,包括在家庭护理中的参与观察和访谈。采用主题分析法对数据进行分析:研究在挪威东部三个城市的家庭护理机构内进行,六名工作人员为主要信息提供者:挪威教育与研究共享服务机构对本研究进行了评估。所有参与者都有资格同意并签署了知情同意书:一项主要挑战是,工作人员发现很难在尊重病人自主权的同时提供适当的护理。我们发现了两大主题:自主性和风险之间的矛盾;以及平衡自主性和风险的策略。这两个主题又分为四个次主题:拒绝和抵制护理;当选择在家生活变得有风险时;甜言蜜语和哄骗;随着时间的推移建立信任。工作人员考虑使用胁迫手段的门槛似乎很高:可以说,居家护理人员需要加强对胁迫行为和相关法律的了解。此外,还需要为伦理反思提供舞台,并培养在反复出现的伦理问题中平衡伦理价值的能力。
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
Nursing Ethics
Nursing Ethics 医学-护理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
11.90%
发文量
117
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing Ethics takes a practical approach to this complex subject and relates each topic to the working environment. The articles on ethical and legal issues are written in a comprehensible style and official documents are analysed in a user-friendly way. The international Editorial Board ensures the selection of a wide range of high quality articles of global significance.
期刊最新文献
Sources of moral distress in nursing professionals: A scoping review. Truth-telling, and ethical considerations in terminal care: an Eastern perspective. Ethical considerations in the UK-Nepal nurse recruitment: Nepali nurses' perspectives. Nurses on the outside, problems on the inside! The duty of nurses to support unions. Care and justice reasoning in nurses' everyday ethics.
×
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