Do the Right Thing: Resolving Ethical Dilemmas in the OR

Sarah C. Smith
{"title":"Do the Right Thing: Resolving Ethical Dilemmas in the OR","authors":"Sarah C. Smith","doi":"10.1097/ASA.0000000000000034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although there have been ethical debates in medicine for centuries, only in the last few decades has bioethics, a term first coined in the 1970s, developed into a formalized and independent field of philosophy. Today, the influence of bioethics is far-reaching, impacting the drafting of laws pertaining to medicine and biotechnology, guiding the development of hospital policies and procedures, and even affecting the physician–patient relationship. Education about bioethics is incorporated into the curriculum for nurses, doctors, and other practitioners, and knowledge of the topic is assessed in many licensing and board certification examinations, including that of the American Board of Anesthesiology. Like bioethics, anesthesiology is also a relatively young field that has experienced tremendous growth in the modern era, and its history is marked by several prominent ethical debates. At one time, the use of anesthesia itself was quite controversial. Within months of William Morton’s successful demonstration of ether anesthesia on October 16, 1846, physicians around the world were utilizing this new discovery on countless surgical patients. Although the advent of painless surgery was met with widespread enthusiasm, it was also recognized almost immediately as a potentially dangerous new technology. Reports of anesthesia-related injuries and deaths were almost immediate and led many to recommend only its most cautious and judicious use. Surgeons at the Pennsylvania Hospital in Philadelphia went so far as to prohibit anesthesia altogether for a full 7 years after its introduction. The ethical debate of whether to utilize anesthesia was not simply limited to issues of safety, however. Many 19th century physicians subscribed to the philosophy of ‘‘natural healing’’ and the belief that pain and sickness arose from behavior that violated the laws of Nature. If anesthesia masked such pain, the patient would not rectify his or her behavior, and the illness would persist (Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/ASA/A573).","PeriodicalId":91163,"journal":{"name":"Refresher courses in anesthesiology","volume":"43 1","pages":"104–111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/ASA.0000000000000034","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Refresher courses in anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ASA.0000000000000034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although there have been ethical debates in medicine for centuries, only in the last few decades has bioethics, a term first coined in the 1970s, developed into a formalized and independent field of philosophy. Today, the influence of bioethics is far-reaching, impacting the drafting of laws pertaining to medicine and biotechnology, guiding the development of hospital policies and procedures, and even affecting the physician–patient relationship. Education about bioethics is incorporated into the curriculum for nurses, doctors, and other practitioners, and knowledge of the topic is assessed in many licensing and board certification examinations, including that of the American Board of Anesthesiology. Like bioethics, anesthesiology is also a relatively young field that has experienced tremendous growth in the modern era, and its history is marked by several prominent ethical debates. At one time, the use of anesthesia itself was quite controversial. Within months of William Morton’s successful demonstration of ether anesthesia on October 16, 1846, physicians around the world were utilizing this new discovery on countless surgical patients. Although the advent of painless surgery was met with widespread enthusiasm, it was also recognized almost immediately as a potentially dangerous new technology. Reports of anesthesia-related injuries and deaths were almost immediate and led many to recommend only its most cautious and judicious use. Surgeons at the Pennsylvania Hospital in Philadelphia went so far as to prohibit anesthesia altogether for a full 7 years after its introduction. The ethical debate of whether to utilize anesthesia was not simply limited to issues of safety, however. Many 19th century physicians subscribed to the philosophy of ‘‘natural healing’’ and the belief that pain and sickness arose from behavior that violated the laws of Nature. If anesthesia masked such pain, the patient would not rectify his or her behavior, and the illness would persist (Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/ASA/A573).
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
做正确的事:解决手术室的伦理困境
尽管医学上的伦理争论已经持续了几个世纪,但直到最近几十年,20世纪70年代首次创造的生命伦理学才发展成为一个正式的、独立的哲学领域。今天,生物伦理学的影响是深远的,影响着与医学和生物技术有关的法律的起草,指导着医院政策和程序的发展,甚至影响着医患关系。关于生物伦理学的教育被纳入护士、医生和其他从业人员的课程中,在许多执照和委员会认证考试中,包括美国麻醉学委员会的考试,都要评估这一主题的知识。像生命伦理学一样,麻醉学也是一个相对年轻的领域,在现代经历了巨大的发展,它的历史以几次突出的伦理辩论为标志。有一段时间,麻醉的使用本身就很有争议。1846年10月16日,威廉·莫顿(William Morton)成功地演示了乙醚麻醉,几个月后,世界各地的医生都在无数外科病人身上使用这一新发现。尽管无痛手术的出现引起了广泛的热情,但它也几乎立即被认为是一种有潜在危险的新技术。与麻醉有关的伤亡报告几乎立即出现,导致许多人只建议最谨慎和明智地使用麻醉。费城宾夕法尼亚医院的外科医生甚至在麻醉引入后的整整7年内完全禁止麻醉。然而,关于是否使用麻醉的伦理争论并不仅仅局限于安全问题。许多19世纪的医生都信奉“自然疗法”的哲学,认为疼痛和疾病是由违反自然规律的行为引起的。如果麻醉掩盖了这种疼痛,病人不会纠正他或她的行为,疾病将持续存在(补充数字内容1,http://links.lww.com/ASA/A573)。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Long-term Functional Outcomes after Regional Anesthesia: A Summary of the Published Evidence and a Recent Cochrane Review. Anesthesia for Head and Neck Surgery Acute Postoperative Pain Management in Infants and Children: Size and Age Do Matter Neuromuscular Management and Patient Outcomes Do the Right Thing: Resolving Ethical Dilemmas in the OR
×
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