Disrupting medical necessity: Setting an old medical ethics theme in new light

Q1 Arts and Humanities Clinical Ethics Pub Date : 2023-02-15 DOI:10.1177/14777509231156046
S. Segers, M. De Proost
{"title":"Disrupting medical necessity: Setting an old medical ethics theme in new light","authors":"S. Segers, M. De Proost","doi":"10.1177/14777509231156046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent medical innovations like ‘omics’ technologies, mobile health (mHealth) applications or telemedicine are perceived as part of a shift towards a more preventive, participatory and affordable healthcare model. These innovations are often regarded as ‘disruptive technologies’. It is a topic of debate to what extent these technologies may transform the medical enterprise, and relatedly, what this means for medical ethics. The question of whether these developments disrupt established ethical principles like respect for autonomy has indeed received increasing normative attention during the past years. Yet, more fundamental ethical considerations of a possible disruption of the concept of ‘medical necessity’ (and the potential ensuing clinical ramifications) have been limited if not absent. It is our modest – though morally and practically relevant – aim to address this objective in this article, by exploring how the current wave of allegedly disruptive innovation is invoking a resurgence of this concept and related debates on ‘the’ goal(s) of medicine.","PeriodicalId":53540,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14777509231156046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Recent medical innovations like ‘omics’ technologies, mobile health (mHealth) applications or telemedicine are perceived as part of a shift towards a more preventive, participatory and affordable healthcare model. These innovations are often regarded as ‘disruptive technologies’. It is a topic of debate to what extent these technologies may transform the medical enterprise, and relatedly, what this means for medical ethics. The question of whether these developments disrupt established ethical principles like respect for autonomy has indeed received increasing normative attention during the past years. Yet, more fundamental ethical considerations of a possible disruption of the concept of ‘medical necessity’ (and the potential ensuing clinical ramifications) have been limited if not absent. It is our modest – though morally and practically relevant – aim to address this objective in this article, by exploring how the current wave of allegedly disruptive innovation is invoking a resurgence of this concept and related debates on ‘the’ goal(s) of medicine.
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
颠覆医疗必要性:从新的角度审视旧的医学伦理主题
最近的医学创新,如“组学”技术、移动医疗(mHealth)应用或远程医疗,被认为是向更具预防性、参与性和可负担性的医疗模式转变的一部分。这些创新通常被视为“颠覆性技术”。这些技术可能在多大程度上改变医疗企业,以及相关的,这对医学伦理意味着什么,这是一个争论的话题。这些发展是否破坏了既定的道德原则,如尊重自主权,这个问题在过去几年里确实得到了越来越多的规范性关注。然而,更基本的伦理考虑可能破坏“医疗必要性”的概念(以及潜在的后续临床后果),即使不是没有,也是有限的。通过探讨当前所谓的颠覆性创新浪潮如何引发这一概念的复苏,以及有关医学“目标”的相关辩论,我们在本文中探讨这一目标是谦虚的(尽管在道德和实践上都是相关的)。
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
Clinical Ethics
Clinical Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
期刊最新文献
Psychiatry as a vocation: Moral injury, COVID-19, and the phenomenology of clinical practice. From a phenomenology of birth towards an ethics of obstetric care Phenomenologies of care: Integrating patient and caregiver narratives into clinical care Loneliness in medicine and relational ethics: A phenomenology of the physician-patient relationship Gross negligence manslaughter of intern doctors – scapegoating or justified?
×
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