To Touch or Not to Touch? An Ethical Reflection and Case Study on Physical Touching in the Pastoral Accompaniment of Vulnerable Persons, Especially Minors and Persons with Intellectual Disabilities

IF 0.7 3区 哲学 0 RELIGION Religions Pub Date : 2023-12-20 DOI:10.3390/rel15010005
Axel Liégeois
{"title":"To Touch or Not to Touch? An Ethical Reflection and Case Study on Physical Touching in the Pastoral Accompaniment of Vulnerable Persons, Especially Minors and Persons with Intellectual Disabilities","authors":"Axel Liégeois","doi":"10.3390/rel15010005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our aim is to develop an ethical reflection and a case study on physical touching by Christian chaplains in their pastoral accompaniment of minors and persons with intellectual disabilities. To this end, we develop an ethical evaluation method consisting of four elements: context; motives; possible actions; and effects. Following this method, we highlight how to evaluate physical touch, formulate ten ethical recommendations, and discuss a case study. Regarding the context of the asymmetric relationship, our recommendations are for chaplains to (1) deal with power in a responsible way and (2) foster their sense of responsibility. Given the complexity of chaplains’ motives, we recommend that chaplains (3) clarify their motives and (4) strengthen their integrity. For the ambiguity of physical touch, we recommend chaplains to (5) seek the appropriateness of touch, (6) consider age and development, and (7) nurture professional ethics. As for the multiplicity of effects for vulnerable persons, our recommendations for chaplains are to (8) give priority to the vulnerable person, (9) not cause harm, and (10) obtain free and informed consent. We encourage chaplains to touch vulnerable persons when appropriate for pastoral accompaniment but to be particularly careful about the use of power and to make a strong effort to obtain consent for touching.","PeriodicalId":38169,"journal":{"name":"Religions","volume":"119 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15010005","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our aim is to develop an ethical reflection and a case study on physical touching by Christian chaplains in their pastoral accompaniment of minors and persons with intellectual disabilities. To this end, we develop an ethical evaluation method consisting of four elements: context; motives; possible actions; and effects. Following this method, we highlight how to evaluate physical touch, formulate ten ethical recommendations, and discuss a case study. Regarding the context of the asymmetric relationship, our recommendations are for chaplains to (1) deal with power in a responsible way and (2) foster their sense of responsibility. Given the complexity of chaplains’ motives, we recommend that chaplains (3) clarify their motives and (4) strengthen their integrity. For the ambiguity of physical touch, we recommend chaplains to (5) seek the appropriateness of touch, (6) consider age and development, and (7) nurture professional ethics. As for the multiplicity of effects for vulnerable persons, our recommendations for chaplains are to (8) give priority to the vulnerable person, (9) not cause harm, and (10) obtain free and informed consent. We encourage chaplains to touch vulnerable persons when appropriate for pastoral accompaniment but to be particularly careful about the use of power and to make a strong effort to obtain consent for touching.
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
触摸还是不触摸?关于牧灵陪伴弱势者(尤其是未成年人和智障人士)时身体接触的伦理反思和案例研究
我们的目的是对基督教牧师在对未成年人和智障人士的牧灵陪伴中进行身体接触的行为进行伦理反思和案例研究。为此,我们制定了一种伦理评估方法,包括四个要素:背景、动机、可能的行动和效果。根据这一方法,我们强调了如何评估身体接触,提出了十项伦理建议,并讨论了一个案例研究。关于不对称关系的背景,我们的建议是,牧师们要(1) 以负责任的方式处理权力,(2) 培养自己的责任感。鉴于牧师动机的复杂性,我们建议牧师(3)澄清动机,(4)加强诚信。对于肢体接触的模糊性,我们建议牧师(5)寻求适当的接触,(6)考虑年龄和发展,(7)培养职业道德。至于对弱势人群的多重影响,我们建议牧师们:(8) 优先考虑弱势人群;(9) 不造成伤害;(10) 征得自由和知情同意。我们鼓励牧师在适当的时候接触易受伤害的人,以进行牧养陪伴,但要特别小心使用权力,并在接触时努力征得他们的同意。
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
Religions
Religions Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
37.50%
发文量
1020
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Religions (ISSN 2077-1444) is an international, open access scholarly journal, publishing peer reviewed studies of religious thought and practice. It is available online to promote critical, hermeneutical, historical, and constructive conversations. Religions publishes regular research papers, reviews, communications and reports on research projects. In addition, the journal accepts comprehensive book reviews by distinguished authors and discussions of important venues for the publication of scholarly work in the study of religion. Religions aims to serve the interests of a wide range of thoughtful readers and academic scholars of religion, as well as theologians, philosophers, social scientists, anthropologists, psychologists, neuroscientists and others interested in the multidisciplinary study of religions
期刊最新文献
“Since I’ve Been Ill, I Live Better”: The Emergence of Latent Spirituality in the Biographical Pathways of Illness The Health/Salvation Nexus: Religion, New Forms of Spirituality, Medicine and the Problem of “Theodicy” Religious Diversity, Minorities and Human Rights: Gaps and Overlaps in Legal Protection The Celestial Masters and the Origins of Daoist Monasticism Metamorphoses of Friendship: Jacques Derrida and Saint Augustine
×
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