医疗从业人员作为帮凶:在印度尼西亚的模糊监管背景下性别肯定的定性研究。

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS BMC Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2025-01-13 DOI:10.1186/s12910-024-01134-9
Benjamin Hegarty, Alegra Wolter, Amalia Puri Handayani, Kevin Marian, Jamee Newland, Dede Oetomo, Ignatius Praptoraharjo, Angela Kelly-Hanku
{"title":"医疗从业人员作为帮凶:在印度尼西亚的模糊监管背景下性别肯定的定性研究。","authors":"Benjamin Hegarty, Alegra Wolter, Amalia Puri Handayani, Kevin Marian, Jamee Newland, Dede Oetomo, Ignatius Praptoraharjo, Angela Kelly-Hanku","doi":"10.1186/s12910-024-01134-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The World Professional Association for Transgender Health guidelines Standards of Care 8 draw on ethical arguments based on individual autonomy, to argue that healthcare and other professionals should be advocates for trans people. Such guidelines presume the presence of medical services for trans people and a degree of consensus on medical ethics. Very little is known, however, about the ethical challenges associated with both providing and accessing trans healthcare, including gender affirmation, in the Global South. In light of the challenges associated with medical and legal gender affirmation in Indonesia, we conducted a qualitative study to understand the views of trans people, healthcare providers, and legal practitioners.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this qualitative study, we drew on a participatory methodology to conduct 46 semi-structured interviews between October and December 2023, with trans people (10 trans feminine people and 10 trans masculine people, each interviewed twice) and key informants (three healthcare providers and three lawyers and paralegals). Trans people were a central part of the research team from inception through to analysis and writing. Participants were recruited via community-led sampling. Data analysis of interview data took place through an immersion/crystallisation technique and preliminary inductive coding which highlighted key quotes. We focused on an inductive analysis using participant narratives to identify key concepts in the ethics of gender affirmation in Indonesia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We characterize the ethics of supportive healthcare workers, community members, and family members, as that akin to \"accomplices,\" a concept of ethics used in theories of racial justice which evaluate a willingness to support people to navigate laws and regulations which perpetuate injustices and violence. Overall, both trans people and key informants shared an understanding that the legal status of gender-affirming medical care was particularly ambiguous in Indonesia due to a lack of clarity in both laws and regulations. For trans participants, ethical arguments for the validity of legal and medical gender affirmation was premised on evidence that their gender identity and expression was already recognized within society, even if limited to immediate friends and family. Given that all participants expressed a desire for gender affirmation, but such services were widely unavailable, accomplices played a crucial role in supporting trans people to access healthcare.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An empirical study based on an \"ethics from below\" helps to show that arguments grounded in autonomy, or based on biomedical evidence, are unlikely to alter unjust laws or facilitate a change to pathologizing guidelines governing understanding of trans people's healthcare and legal needs in Indonesia. We provide an analysis that is sensitive to the ethics of facilitating gender affirmation in a context where that process is inherently social, and often articulated in relation to a prevailing religious morality.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"26 1","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11726924/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Healthcare practitioners as accomplices: a qualitative study of gender affirmation in a context of ambiguous regulation in Indonesia.\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Hegarty, Alegra Wolter, Amalia Puri Handayani, Kevin Marian, Jamee Newland, Dede Oetomo, Ignatius Praptoraharjo, Angela Kelly-Hanku\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12910-024-01134-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The World Professional Association for Transgender Health guidelines Standards of Care 8 draw on ethical arguments based on individual autonomy, to argue that healthcare and other professionals should be advocates for trans people. Such guidelines presume the presence of medical services for trans people and a degree of consensus on medical ethics. Very little is known, however, about the ethical challenges associated with both providing and accessing trans healthcare, including gender affirmation, in the Global South. In light of the challenges associated with medical and legal gender affirmation in Indonesia, we conducted a qualitative study to understand the views of trans people, healthcare providers, and legal practitioners.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this qualitative study, we drew on a participatory methodology to conduct 46 semi-structured interviews between October and December 2023, with trans people (10 trans feminine people and 10 trans masculine people, each interviewed twice) and key informants (three healthcare providers and three lawyers and paralegals). Trans people were a central part of the research team from inception through to analysis and writing. Participants were recruited via community-led sampling. Data analysis of interview data took place through an immersion/crystallisation technique and preliminary inductive coding which highlighted key quotes. We focused on an inductive analysis using participant narratives to identify key concepts in the ethics of gender affirmation in Indonesia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We characterize the ethics of supportive healthcare workers, community members, and family members, as that akin to \\\"accomplices,\\\" a concept of ethics used in theories of racial justice which evaluate a willingness to support people to navigate laws and regulations which perpetuate injustices and violence. Overall, both trans people and key informants shared an understanding that the legal status of gender-affirming medical care was particularly ambiguous in Indonesia due to a lack of clarity in both laws and regulations. For trans participants, ethical arguments for the validity of legal and medical gender affirmation was premised on evidence that their gender identity and expression was already recognized within society, even if limited to immediate friends and family. Given that all participants expressed a desire for gender affirmation, but such services were widely unavailable, accomplices played a crucial role in supporting trans people to access healthcare.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An empirical study based on an \\\"ethics from below\\\" helps to show that arguments grounded in autonomy, or based on biomedical evidence, are unlikely to alter unjust laws or facilitate a change to pathologizing guidelines governing understanding of trans people's healthcare and legal needs in Indonesia. We provide an analysis that is sensitive to the ethics of facilitating gender affirmation in a context where that process is inherently social, and often articulated in relation to a prevailing religious morality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11726924/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01134-9\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01134-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:世界跨性别健康专业协会指南《护理标准》8借鉴了基于个人自主的伦理论点,认为医疗保健和其他专业人员应该成为跨性别者的倡导者。这些指导方针假定存在针对跨性别者的医疗服务,并在医疗道德方面达成一定程度的共识。然而,我们对南半球提供和获得跨性别医疗保健(包括性别确认)所面临的伦理挑战知之甚少。鉴于印尼在医疗和法律上确认性别方面面临的挑战,我们进行了一项定性研究,以了解跨性别者、医疗保健提供者和法律从业人员的观点。方法:在这项定性研究中,我们采用参与式方法,在2023年10月至12月期间对46名跨性别者(10名跨性别女性和10名跨性别男性,每人接受两次采访)和关键信息提供者(3名医疗保健提供者和3名律师和律师助理)进行了半结构化访谈。跨性别者是研究团队从开始到分析和写作的核心部分。参与者是通过社区主导的抽样方式招募的。通过浸入/结晶技术和初步归纳编码对访谈数据进行了数据分析,并突出了关键报价。我们专注于归纳分析,使用参与者的叙述,以确定在印度尼西亚性别肯定的伦理的关键概念。结果:我们将支持性医疗工作者、社区成员和家庭成员的道德特征描述为类似于“帮凶”,这是种族正义理论中使用的一个道德概念,用于评估支持人们遵守使不公正和暴力永续存在的法律法规的意愿。总体而言,跨性别者和主要举报人都认为,由于法律和法规缺乏明确性,在印度尼西亚,肯定性别的医疗保健的法律地位特别模糊。对于跨性别参与者来说,法律和医学上的性别确认有效性的伦理论据是基于他们的性别认同和表达已经在社会上得到承认的证据,即使仅限于直接的朋友和家人。鉴于所有参与者都表达了性别确认的愿望,但这种服务普遍缺乏,帮犯在支持跨性别者获得医疗保健方面发挥了至关重要的作用。结论:一项基于“自下而上的伦理”的实证研究有助于表明,基于自主或基于生物医学证据的论点不太可能改变不公正的法律,也不太可能促进对印度尼西亚跨性别者医疗保健和法律需求理解的病态化指导方针的改变。我们提供了一种对促进性别肯定的伦理敏感的分析,在这种背景下,这一过程本质上是社会的,并且经常与流行的宗教道德有关。
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
Healthcare practitioners as accomplices: a qualitative study of gender affirmation in a context of ambiguous regulation in Indonesia.

Background: The World Professional Association for Transgender Health guidelines Standards of Care 8 draw on ethical arguments based on individual autonomy, to argue that healthcare and other professionals should be advocates for trans people. Such guidelines presume the presence of medical services for trans people and a degree of consensus on medical ethics. Very little is known, however, about the ethical challenges associated with both providing and accessing trans healthcare, including gender affirmation, in the Global South. In light of the challenges associated with medical and legal gender affirmation in Indonesia, we conducted a qualitative study to understand the views of trans people, healthcare providers, and legal practitioners.

Methods: In this qualitative study, we drew on a participatory methodology to conduct 46 semi-structured interviews between October and December 2023, with trans people (10 trans feminine people and 10 trans masculine people, each interviewed twice) and key informants (three healthcare providers and three lawyers and paralegals). Trans people were a central part of the research team from inception through to analysis and writing. Participants were recruited via community-led sampling. Data analysis of interview data took place through an immersion/crystallisation technique and preliminary inductive coding which highlighted key quotes. We focused on an inductive analysis using participant narratives to identify key concepts in the ethics of gender affirmation in Indonesia.

Results: We characterize the ethics of supportive healthcare workers, community members, and family members, as that akin to "accomplices," a concept of ethics used in theories of racial justice which evaluate a willingness to support people to navigate laws and regulations which perpetuate injustices and violence. Overall, both trans people and key informants shared an understanding that the legal status of gender-affirming medical care was particularly ambiguous in Indonesia due to a lack of clarity in both laws and regulations. For trans participants, ethical arguments for the validity of legal and medical gender affirmation was premised on evidence that their gender identity and expression was already recognized within society, even if limited to immediate friends and family. Given that all participants expressed a desire for gender affirmation, but such services were widely unavailable, accomplices played a crucial role in supporting trans people to access healthcare.

Conclusions: An empirical study based on an "ethics from below" helps to show that arguments grounded in autonomy, or based on biomedical evidence, are unlikely to alter unjust laws or facilitate a change to pathologizing guidelines governing understanding of trans people's healthcare and legal needs in Indonesia. We provide an analysis that is sensitive to the ethics of facilitating gender affirmation in a context where that process is inherently social, and often articulated in relation to a prevailing religious morality.

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
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
期刊最新文献
Moral distress among maternal-fetal medicine fellows: a national survey study. Correction: Evaluating the understanding of the ethical and moral challenges of Big Data and AI among Jordanian medical students, physicians in training, and senior practitioners: a cross-sectional study. Status of scientific research integrity knowledge in dental undergraduates from 34 universities in China. Effect of healthcare professionals' perceived occupational stigma on organizational citizenship behavior: a moral cleansing perspective. Adolescent and parental proxy online record access: analysis of the empirical evidence based on four bioethical principles.
×
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