驾驭严重和持久(长期)进食障碍的复杂伦理问题:批判性反思实践和合作决策的工具。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Journal of Eating Disorders Pub Date : 2024-09-06 DOI:10.1186/s40337-024-01082-0
Sacha Kendall Jamieson, Jacinta Tan, Kym Piekunka, Shannon Calvert, Stephen Anderson
{"title":"驾驭严重和持久(长期)进食障碍的复杂伦理问题:批判性反思实践和合作决策的工具。","authors":"Sacha Kendall Jamieson, Jacinta Tan, Kym Piekunka, Shannon Calvert, Stephen Anderson","doi":"10.1186/s40337-024-01082-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Decisions about the treatment of eating disorders do not occur in a socio-political vacuum. They are shaped by power relations that produce categories of risk and determine who is worthy of care. This impacts who gets access to care and recognition of rights in mental health services. Globally, there are calls for more human rights-based approaches in mental health services to reduce coercion, improve collaborative decision making and enhance community care. Treating individuals with longstanding, Severe and Enduring Eating Disorders (SEED) or Severe and Enduring Anorexia Nervosa (SE-AN) can be particularly problematic when it involves highly controversial issues such as treatment withdrawal and end-of-life decisions and, where legally permissible, medically assisted dying. In this article, we argue that the socio-political context in which clinical decision making occurs must be accounted for in these ethical considerations. This encompasses considerations of how power and resources are distributed, who controls these decisions, who benefits and who is harmed by these decisions, who is excluded from services, and who is marginalised in decision making processes. The article also presents tools for critically reflective practice and collaborative decision-making that can support clinicians in considering power factors in their practice and assisting individuals with longstanding eating disorders, SEED and SE-AN to attain their rights in mental health services.</p>","PeriodicalId":48605,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eating Disorders","volume":"12 1","pages":"134"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378593/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Navigating the ethical complexities of severe and enduring (longstanding) eating disorders: tools for critically reflective practice and collaborative decision-making.\",\"authors\":\"Sacha Kendall Jamieson, Jacinta Tan, Kym Piekunka, Shannon Calvert, Stephen Anderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40337-024-01082-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Decisions about the treatment of eating disorders do not occur in a socio-political vacuum. They are shaped by power relations that produce categories of risk and determine who is worthy of care. This impacts who gets access to care and recognition of rights in mental health services. Globally, there are calls for more human rights-based approaches in mental health services to reduce coercion, improve collaborative decision making and enhance community care. Treating individuals with longstanding, Severe and Enduring Eating Disorders (SEED) or Severe and Enduring Anorexia Nervosa (SE-AN) can be particularly problematic when it involves highly controversial issues such as treatment withdrawal and end-of-life decisions and, where legally permissible, medically assisted dying. In this article, we argue that the socio-political context in which clinical decision making occurs must be accounted for in these ethical considerations. This encompasses considerations of how power and resources are distributed, who controls these decisions, who benefits and who is harmed by these decisions, who is excluded from services, and who is marginalised in decision making processes. The article also presents tools for critically reflective practice and collaborative decision-making that can support clinicians in considering power factors in their practice and assisting individuals with longstanding eating disorders, SEED and SE-AN to attain their rights in mental health services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48605,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Eating Disorders\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"134\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378593/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Eating Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40337-024-01082-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Eating Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40337-024-01082-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有关饮食失调症治疗的决定并不是在社会政治真空中做出的。它们受权力关系的影响,权力关系产生了风险类别,并决定了谁值得接受治疗。这影响到谁能获得心理健康服务中的治疗和对权利的认可。在全球范围内,人们呼吁在心理健康服务中采用更多基于人权的方法,以减少胁迫、改善合作决策和加强社区关怀。治疗患有长期、严重和持久进食障碍(SEED)或严重和持久神经性厌食症(SE-AN)的患者,如果涉及到极具争议性的问题,如治疗撤消和临终决定,以及在法律允许的情况下进行医学协助死亡,就会特别成问题。在本文中,我们认为在进行这些伦理考虑时,必须考虑到临床决策所处的社会政治环境。这包括考虑权力和资源如何分配、谁控制这些决策、谁受益于这些决策、谁受到这些决策的伤害、谁被排除在服务之外、谁在决策过程中被边缘化。文章还介绍了批判性反思实践和合作决策的工具,这些工具可以支持临床医生在实践中考虑权力因素,并帮助患有长期进食障碍、SEED 和 SE-AN 的患者在心理健康服务中获得他们的权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Navigating the ethical complexities of severe and enduring (longstanding) eating disorders: tools for critically reflective practice and collaborative decision-making.

Decisions about the treatment of eating disorders do not occur in a socio-political vacuum. They are shaped by power relations that produce categories of risk and determine who is worthy of care. This impacts who gets access to care and recognition of rights in mental health services. Globally, there are calls for more human rights-based approaches in mental health services to reduce coercion, improve collaborative decision making and enhance community care. Treating individuals with longstanding, Severe and Enduring Eating Disorders (SEED) or Severe and Enduring Anorexia Nervosa (SE-AN) can be particularly problematic when it involves highly controversial issues such as treatment withdrawal and end-of-life decisions and, where legally permissible, medically assisted dying. In this article, we argue that the socio-political context in which clinical decision making occurs must be accounted for in these ethical considerations. This encompasses considerations of how power and resources are distributed, who controls these decisions, who benefits and who is harmed by these decisions, who is excluded from services, and who is marginalised in decision making processes. The article also presents tools for critically reflective practice and collaborative decision-making that can support clinicians in considering power factors in their practice and assisting individuals with longstanding eating disorders, SEED and SE-AN to attain their rights in mental health services.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Eating Disorders
Journal of Eating Disorders Neuroscience-Behavioral Neuroscience
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
17.10%
发文量
161
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Eating Disorders is the first open access, peer-reviewed journal publishing leading research in the science and clinical practice of eating disorders. It disseminates research that provides answers to the important issues and key challenges in the field of eating disorders and to facilitate translation of evidence into practice. The journal publishes research on all aspects of eating disorders namely their epidemiology, nature, determinants, neurobiology, prevention, treatment and outcomes. The scope includes, but is not limited to anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder and other eating disorders. Related areas such as important co-morbidities, obesity, body image, appetite, food and eating are also included. Articles about research methodology and assessment are welcomed where they advance the field of eating disorders.
期刊最新文献
From fixing to connecting: parents' experiences supporting adult children with eating disorders. Growing up in a larger body: youth- and parent-reported triggers for illness and barriers to recovery from anorexia nervosa. Correction: The role of impulsivity and binge eating in outpatients with overweight or obesity: an EEG temporal discounting study. Muscularity-oriented disordered eating: investigating body image concerns and the moderating role of emotion dysregulation in cyclists. Neurodivergence, intersectionality, and eating disorders: a lived experience-led narrative review.
×
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