The Banality of Data: Patient Records, Nursing, and Ideology.

IF 0.6 Q4 NURSING Creative Nursing Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-05 DOI:10.1177/10784535241277856
Hans-Peter de Ruiter, Melanie Breznik
{"title":"The Banality of Data: Patient Records, Nursing, and Ideology.","authors":"Hans-Peter de Ruiter, Melanie Breznik","doi":"10.1177/10784535241277856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article explores nursing, patient records, and ideology within the context of the National Socialist \"euthanasia\" program (<i>Aktion</i> T4) in Germany and Austria from 1939 to 1941, which targeted individuals with mental and physical disabilities for systematic killing. Using Hannah Arendt's concept of the \"banality of evil,\" it examines how ordinary individuals, including nurses, became agents of atrocity by adhering to bureaucratic orders. Jacques Ellul's Ethics of Technology framework is employed to analyze how National Socialist ideology manipulated technological processes to enhance efficiency in genocidal goals. Propaganda was crucial in garnering public support, blurring the lines between technology, ethics, and ideology. Archival research at documentation centers and national archives reveals methods for deciding who was killed, the role of family in medical records, and nurses' involvement in the T4 operation. Three narratives of T4 victims illustrate the personal impacts of these bureaucratic and ideological practices. The article reflects on contemporary nursing, emphasizing the importance of ethical standards and vigilance against data and misuse of technology in health care. This historical examination serves as a reminder of the potential consequences of depersonalization and blind adherence to institutional priorities, underscoring the need for critical engagement with the ethical dimensions of nursing practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":54104,"journal":{"name":"Creative Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Creative Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10784535241277856","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article explores nursing, patient records, and ideology within the context of the National Socialist "euthanasia" program (Aktion T4) in Germany and Austria from 1939 to 1941, which targeted individuals with mental and physical disabilities for systematic killing. Using Hannah Arendt's concept of the "banality of evil," it examines how ordinary individuals, including nurses, became agents of atrocity by adhering to bureaucratic orders. Jacques Ellul's Ethics of Technology framework is employed to analyze how National Socialist ideology manipulated technological processes to enhance efficiency in genocidal goals. Propaganda was crucial in garnering public support, blurring the lines between technology, ethics, and ideology. Archival research at documentation centers and national archives reveals methods for deciding who was killed, the role of family in medical records, and nurses' involvement in the T4 operation. Three narratives of T4 victims illustrate the personal impacts of these bureaucratic and ideological practices. The article reflects on contemporary nursing, emphasizing the importance of ethical standards and vigilance against data and misuse of technology in health care. This historical examination serves as a reminder of the potential consequences of depersonalization and blind adherence to institutional priorities, underscoring the need for critical engagement with the ethical dimensions of nursing practice.

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
数据的平庸:病历、护理和意识形态。
1939 年至 1941 年期间,德国和奥地利实施了国家社会主义 "安乐死 "计划(Aktion T4),该计划针对精神和身体残疾者进行系统性的杀害,本文在此背景下探讨了护理、病历和意识形态。该书利用汉娜-阿伦特(Hannah Arendt)的 "平庸之恶 "概念,探讨了包括护士在内的普通人如何通过遵守官僚命令而成为暴行的代理人。雅克-埃卢尔(Jacques Ellul)的 "技术伦理"(Ethics of Technology)框架被用来分析国家社会主义意识形态如何操纵技术流程来提高种族灭绝目标的效率。宣传对于赢得公众支持至关重要,它模糊了技术、伦理和意识形态之间的界限。文献中心和国家档案馆的档案研究揭示了决定谁被杀害的方法、家属在医疗记录中的作用以及护士在 T4 行动中的参与。三位 T4 受害者的叙述说明了这些官僚主义和意识形态做法对个人的影响。文章对当代护理工作进行了反思,强调了道德标准的重要性,并对医疗保健中的数据和技术滥用保持警惕。这一历史研究提醒我们,非人格化和盲目遵从机构优先事项可能带来的后果,并强调了批判性地参与护理实践的道德层面的必要性。
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
Creative Nursing
Creative Nursing NURSING-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: Creative Nursing is an issue focused journal, unique in its recognition of the values inherent in the nursing profession. Excellence and professionalism are not exclusive to any one discipline or specialty, and the editors of Creative Nursing are dedicated to developing nursing leaders at all levels and in all settings. Today"s health care institutions need creative and innovative solutions. Nurses need to think creatively, to experiment, to take risks, and to innovate. Creative Nursing promotes best practices in all aspects of caring--caring for self, patients, families, colleagues, and communities.
期刊最新文献
Improving Patient Experience and Team Engagement with Environmental Services: Application of Watson's Theory of Human Caring. The Unique Perspective of an Expert Humanitarian Nurse: A Case Study. Exploring Nursing Professionalism: A Focused Ethnography of Community Nurses in Slovakia. System Innovation: A Holistic Approach to Disrupting With Love and Human Caring, by Julie Kennedy Oehlert and Kathleen Sitzman. Allyship with Psychiatric Patients for Health Care Practice Reform: A Case Study of a Narrative Approach Using Patient-Authored Medical Records.
×
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