{"title":"Hard Core Ethics","authors":"S. Davis","doi":"10.18785/OJHE.1401.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/OJHE.1401.01","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47095874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ethicists often work alone in rural locations while also holding leadership roles. Who helps the ethicist when he/she experiences an ethical dilemma or moral distress?” asked an ethicist. Purposes of this descriptive exploratory convenience research project were to (1) Identify the ethical issues personally experienced by clinical ethicists while fulfilling their professional role, and (2) Describe the resources that clinical ethicists have or desire for resolving these personally experienced ethical situations. A random purposive sampling strategy was implemented. IRB approval was obtained. 12 clinical ethicists participated. Eight of the participants had experienced a personal ethical issue while performing their clinical ethicist role. Ethical issues described include: maintaining confidentiality, non-professional communication, moral distress, identifying the correct decision-maker, acts of deception, and conflicts created by dual roles. Each of these identified work related ethical issues reflects potential or actual communication breakdowns, such as lying, failure to disclose values, or incidents of miscommunication.
{"title":"Ethical Issues Perceived by Clinical Ethicists","authors":"M. Bosek, B. Fulmer","doi":"10.18785/OJHE.1401.06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/OJHE.1401.06","url":null,"abstract":"Ethicists often work alone in rural locations while also holding leadership roles. Who helps the ethicist when he/she experiences an ethical dilemma or moral distress?” asked an ethicist. Purposes of this descriptive exploratory convenience research project were to (1) Identify the ethical issues personally experienced by clinical ethicists while fulfilling their professional role, and (2) Describe the resources that clinical ethicists have or desire for resolving these personally experienced ethical situations. A random purposive sampling strategy was implemented. IRB approval was obtained. 12 clinical ethicists participated. Eight of the participants had experienced a personal ethical issue while performing their clinical ethicist role. Ethical issues described include: maintaining confidentiality, non-professional communication, moral distress, identifying the correct decision-maker, acts of deception, and conflicts created by dual roles. Each of these identified work related ethical issues reflects potential or actual communication breakdowns, such as lying, failure to disclose values, or incidents of miscommunication.","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46154248","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 2016, there were approximately 22.5 million refugees displaced outside their home country because of armed conflict, over half of whom are minors. Syria reported the highest number, with over eleven million refugees displaced, both internally and externally, from zones of conflict in 2017. Over five million Syrian refugees, between the years 2011 and 2017, have fled to other countries including: Lebanon (1.1 million), Jordan (660,000), Egypt (122,000), Turkey (2.9 million) and Iraq (241,000). Exposure to war, displacement, and violence deprives women and children of the basic right to health, including the “right to control one’s health and body” and “protection of women from domestic violence” Furthermore, General Comment 14 describes a broader scope of health including protection from armed conflicts and violence for both women and children. Cumulative trauma from violence, displacement, and exploitation by trafficking in refugee populations, has also been directly related to chronic mental and physical health issues. Countries accepting the largest number of refugees from Syria have been accepted in non-signatory countries of the UN Convention on Refugees, with few exceptions. European Union Countries, United Kingdom, Canada, USA, and Australia have taken in less Syrian refugees combined than any of the five above listed resourcechallenged countries. The Gulf Cooperative Council (GCC), which is not a signatory to the UN Convention of Refugees and is not required to take in refugees, has provided substantial monetary support to the Syrian Refugee Crisis. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) provided over $530 million USD for Syrian Humanitarian Relief since the crisis began and is the largest contributor to aid in the region (Al-Khateeb, 2015). Over $40 billion USD was donated by Gulf Cooperative Countries for all crisis in the region, including the Syrian conflict. However, refugee resettlement remains restricted in GCC countries to those with viable professions and resistance to acceptance of Syrian refugees by signatory Western Nation States has placed a large burden on a few resource-poor countries. Specifically, this paper addresses health and human rights violations related to violence and trafficking of women and children refugees across Syrian borders into Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Egypt and propose comprehensive program interventions to address the health and human rights issues of women and children
{"title":"Health and Human Rights of Syrian Women and Children Refugees: Trafficking, Resettlement, and the United Nations Convention on Refugees Revisited","authors":"Walton, Dpt, Clt, Lori Maria","doi":"10.18785/OJHE.1401.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/OJHE.1401.04","url":null,"abstract":"In 2016, there were approximately 22.5 million refugees displaced outside their home country because of armed conflict, over half of whom are minors. Syria reported the highest number, with over eleven million refugees displaced, both internally and externally, from zones of conflict in 2017. Over five million Syrian refugees, between the years 2011 and 2017, have fled to other countries including: Lebanon (1.1 million), Jordan (660,000), Egypt (122,000), Turkey (2.9 million) and Iraq (241,000). Exposure to war, displacement, and violence deprives women and children of the basic right to health, including the “right to control one’s health and body” and “protection of women from domestic violence” Furthermore, General Comment 14 describes a broader scope of health including protection from armed conflicts and violence for both women and children. Cumulative trauma from violence, displacement, and exploitation by trafficking in refugee populations, has also been directly related to chronic mental and physical health issues. Countries accepting the largest number of refugees from Syria have been accepted in non-signatory countries of the UN Convention on Refugees, with few exceptions. European Union Countries, United Kingdom, Canada, USA, and Australia have taken in less Syrian refugees combined than any of the five above listed resourcechallenged countries. The Gulf Cooperative Council (GCC), which is not a signatory to the UN Convention of Refugees and is not required to take in refugees, has provided substantial monetary support to the Syrian Refugee Crisis. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) provided over $530 million USD for Syrian Humanitarian Relief since the crisis began and is the largest contributor to aid in the region (Al-Khateeb, 2015). Over $40 billion USD was donated by Gulf Cooperative Countries for all crisis in the region, including the Syrian conflict. However, refugee resettlement remains restricted in GCC countries to those with viable professions and resistance to acceptance of Syrian refugees by signatory Western Nation States has placed a large burden on a few resource-poor countries. Specifically, this paper addresses health and human rights violations related to violence and trafficking of women and children refugees across Syrian borders into Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Egypt and propose comprehensive program interventions to address the health and human rights issues of women and children","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46332147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Racial determinations that lead to race-based treatments and mistreatments have many harmful social effects. When used in the practice of medicine, can racial determinants lead to good outcomes? This is an emerging question in medical ethics. It is undoubtedly true that some individuals are more genetically prone to some diseases than others. However, should one rush to judgment with the belief that race may be a valid indicator in identifying diseases an individual is susceptible to? Furthermore, should race be considered in prescribing treatment? Illnesses such as sickle cell-anemia and Tay Sachs disease have long been thought to have a racial origin. This assumption is challenged in this paper. There have also been attempts to prescribe specific drugs for specific racial groups; but this is approach call for further inquiry. Belief in the presupposition that disease is a bio-psycho-social process implies that genetic predispositions are only one factor among many others that relate to the way things are socially constructed. This paper seeks to critique one’s view of the use of race as a criterion of medicine to prescribe treatment.
{"title":"Should Doctors Take Into Account Human Races? A Medical Ethics Approach","authors":"G. Andrade","doi":"10.18785/OJHE.1401.09","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/OJHE.1401.09","url":null,"abstract":"Racial determinations that lead to race-based treatments and mistreatments have many harmful social effects. When used in the practice of medicine, can racial determinants lead to good outcomes? This is an emerging question in medical ethics. It is undoubtedly true that some individuals are more genetically prone to some diseases than others. However, should one rush to judgment with the belief that race may be a valid indicator in identifying diseases an individual is susceptible to? Furthermore, should race be considered in prescribing treatment? Illnesses such as sickle cell-anemia and Tay Sachs disease have long been thought to have a racial origin. This assumption is challenged in this paper. There have also been attempts to prescribe specific drugs for specific racial groups; but this is approach call for further inquiry. Belief in the presupposition that disease is a bio-psycho-social process implies that genetic predispositions are only one factor among many others that relate to the way things are socially constructed. This paper seeks to critique one’s view of the use of race as a criterion of medicine to prescribe treatment.","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42052350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Recently, several states have passed legislation allowing conscientious objection for social workers. Due to the potential impact on the profession that these policies carry, it is critical that this issue be explored and discussed within the social work profession. This article examines the arguments for and against conscientious objection, discusses the use of conscientious objection in other professions, and then explores the potential options and consequences for social work. The argument is made that the profession of social work should seek to define itself and its values related to conscientious objection before outside forces make the decision for us.
{"title":"At a Crossroads: Social Work, Conscientious Objection, and Religious Liberty Laws","authors":"P. Mongan","doi":"10.18785/OJHE.1401.08","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/OJHE.1401.08","url":null,"abstract":"Recently, several states have passed legislation allowing conscientious objection for social workers. Due to the potential impact on the profession that these policies carry, it is critical that this issue be explored and discussed within the social work profession. This article examines the arguments for and against conscientious objection, discusses the use of conscientious objection in other professions, and then explores the potential options and consequences for social work. The argument is made that the profession of social work should seek to define itself and its values related to conscientious objection before outside forces make the decision for us.","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46725902","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper explores several issues regarding the treatment and care for patients suffering from dementia, including a discussion of the relatively low time and money spent on dementia research compared to research on cancer and cardio-vascular diseases. It also discusses the special relationship between the person suffering from dementia and their caregiver, who is often a loved one. The paper employs principlism and so examines these issues from a consideration of autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice.
{"title":"Some Ethical Issues in Treating and Caring for People with Dementia","authors":"Stewart Ba, Ma, R. Scott","doi":"10.18785/OJHE.1401.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/OJHE.1401.05","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores several issues regarding the treatment and care for patients suffering from dementia, including a discussion of the relatively low time and money spent on dementia research compared to research on cancer and cardio-vascular diseases. It also discusses the special relationship between the person suffering from dementia and their caregiver, who is often a loved one. The paper employs principlism and so examines these issues from a consideration of autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice.","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42064571","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
An increasingly blurred understanding of the ethical significance of global "transplant transactions" - a curious combination of altruism and commerce, consent and coercion, gifts and theft, science and sorcery, care and human sacrifice - suggest a critical need to revisit the fundamental moral normlessness of the trafficking enterprise. This essay grounds its arguments in two, straightforward premises: (i) the ethical principle of respect for human vulnerability is an indispensable measure of the licitness of most, if not all, moral actions; and (ii) human organ trafficking violates the ethical principle of respect for human vulnerability. Drawing from this syllogism, the aim and proposal of this essay posits the argument that human organ trafficking cannot, in most, if not all, cases, be morally justified insofar as it violates the ethical principle of respect for human vulnerability.
{"title":"The Ethical Principle of Vulnerability and the Case Against Human Organ Trafficking","authors":"Peter A. DePergola","doi":"10.18785/OJHE.1401.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/OJHE.1401.02","url":null,"abstract":"An increasingly blurred understanding of the ethical significance of global \"transplant transactions\" - a curious combination of altruism and commerce, consent and coercion, gifts and theft, science and sorcery, care and human sacrifice - suggest a critical need to revisit the fundamental moral normlessness of the trafficking enterprise. This essay grounds its arguments in two, straightforward premises: (i) the ethical principle of respect for human vulnerability is an indispensable measure of the licitness of most, if not all, moral actions; and (ii) human organ trafficking violates the ethical principle of respect for human vulnerability. Drawing from this syllogism, the aim and proposal of this essay posits the argument that human organ trafficking cannot, in most, if not all, cases, be morally justified insofar as it violates the ethical principle of respect for human vulnerability.","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48463745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Private sector rehabilitation counsellors operate in a dynamic and complex environment in which their decisions are influenced by several stakeholder interests including workers’ compensation authority regulators, scheme appointed agents, employers, and injured workers. The potentially competing interests of all parties often challenge the values and professional responsibilities of rehabilitation counsellors. The current study aimed to address the gap identified in the literature concerning ethical dilemmas unique to private sector rehabilitation counselling in Australia. A qualitative methodology was adopted to examine: a) the types of ethical dilemmas most encountered by rehabilitation counsellors working in the context of private sector settings; and b) rehabilitation counsellors' preferred methods for resolving ethical dilemmas in this context. Findings revealed that rehabilitation counsellors interviewed had experienced an array of ethical dilemmas in their practice, reflecting some of the inherent challenges in Australia’s private rehabilitation sector. The findings have implications for the ethics education and professional development of rehabilitation counsellors, and provide a foundation for future ethics research in rehabilitation counselling.
{"title":"Ethical Dilemmas Experienced by Australian Rehabilitation Counsellors","authors":"V. McLennan, Kerry A Ryan, Christine Randall","doi":"10.18785/OJHE.1401.07","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/OJHE.1401.07","url":null,"abstract":"Private sector rehabilitation counsellors operate in a dynamic and complex environment in \u0000which their decisions are influenced by several stakeholder interests including workers’ \u0000compensation authority regulators, scheme appointed agents, employers, and injured workers. \u0000The potentially competing interests of all parties often challenge the values and professional \u0000responsibilities of rehabilitation counsellors. The current study aimed to address the gap \u0000identified in the literature concerning ethical dilemmas unique to private sector rehabilitation \u0000counselling in Australia. A qualitative methodology was adopted to examine: a) the types of \u0000ethical dilemmas most encountered by rehabilitation counsellors working in the context of \u0000private sector settings; and b) rehabilitation counsellors' preferred methods for resolving \u0000ethical dilemmas in this context. Findings revealed that rehabilitation counsellors interviewed \u0000had experienced an array of ethical dilemmas in their practice, reflecting some of the inherent \u0000challenges in Australia’s private rehabilitation sector. The findings have implications for the \u0000ethics education and professional development of rehabilitation counsellors, and provide a \u0000foundation for future ethics research in rehabilitation counselling.","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"7-1-7-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45314275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
An increasingly blurred understanding of the distinctive challenges posed to transplantation medicine and, by extension, public health, by the debilitating reality of alcoholism suggests a critical need to revisit the relationship between causality, candidacy, and culpability in light of substance addiction. This essay grounds its arguments in two, straightforward premises: (i) compassionate medical practice understood as the sympathetic willingness to enter into the existential suffering of another in order to ameliorate the anguish invoked by disease rests on the fiduciary relationship shared between provider and patient; and, (ii) allocating medical goods according to moral desert rather than existential disposition undermines the fundamental nature of medicine and the functioning of the provider-patient relationship. Drawing from this syllogism, the aim and proposal of this essay posits the argument that employing moral desert as an allocation criteria to inhibit alcoholic patients from equal consideration and treatment is, and ought to remain, at odds with the fundamental nature of medicine and the functioning of the provider-patient relationship.
{"title":"The Ethical Justification of Equal Candidacy for Organ Transplantation in Alcoholic Patients","authors":"Peter A. DePergola","doi":"10.18785/OJHE.1401.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/OJHE.1401.03","url":null,"abstract":"An increasingly blurred understanding of the distinctive challenges posed to transplantation medicine and, by extension, public health, by the debilitating reality of alcoholism suggests a critical need to revisit the relationship between causality, candidacy, and culpability in light of substance addiction. This essay grounds its arguments in two, straightforward premises: (i) compassionate medical practice understood as the sympathetic willingness to enter into the existential suffering of another in order to ameliorate the anguish invoked by disease rests on the fiduciary relationship shared between provider and patient; and, (ii) allocating medical goods according to moral desert rather than existential disposition undermines the fundamental nature of medicine and the functioning of the provider-patient relationship. Drawing from this syllogism, the aim and proposal of this essay posits the argument that employing moral desert as an allocation criteria to inhibit alcoholic patients from equal consideration and treatment is, and ought to remain, at odds with the fundamental nature of medicine and the functioning of the provider-patient relationship.","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45633386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Worldwide Ethics 2017","authors":"S. Davis","doi":"10.18785/ojhe.1301.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18785/ojhe.1301.01","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":89828,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of health ethics","volume":"13 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49511865","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：