一个属于自己的地方:在生命伦理咨询中运用风险的尊严。

IF 0.8 4区 医学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Perspectives in Biology and Medicine Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1353/pbm.2022.0019
Adira Hulkower
{"title":"一个属于自己的地方:在生命伦理咨询中运用风险的尊严。","authors":"Adira Hulkower","doi":"10.1353/pbm.2022.0019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Hospitals have both a regulatory and an ethical mandate to craft a safe discharge plan for all patients. These plans can become a source of conflict between clinicians and patients when they have differing conceptions of safety and best interests. In bioethics principles this conflict can be characterized as the tension between the patient's right to make medical decisions in accordance with their values, or autonomy, and the clinician's obligation to provide best care to their patients, or beneficence. Employed independently, these principles can be limiting and may not accommodate the nuanced narrative of patients who lack decisional capacity but have expressed clear preferences about where they wish to live. Utilizing case-based discussion, this article explores how the inclusion of Robert Perske's dignity of risk principal in bioethics consultation can support clinicians in expanding their conceptions of beneficence and safety, providing the team with the freedom to craft discharge plans that keep the patient at the center of the narrative.</p>","PeriodicalId":54627,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives in Biology and Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Place of His Own: Applying Dignity of Risk to Bioethics Consultation.\",\"authors\":\"Adira Hulkower\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/pbm.2022.0019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Hospitals have both a regulatory and an ethical mandate to craft a safe discharge plan for all patients. These plans can become a source of conflict between clinicians and patients when they have differing conceptions of safety and best interests. In bioethics principles this conflict can be characterized as the tension between the patient's right to make medical decisions in accordance with their values, or autonomy, and the clinician's obligation to provide best care to their patients, or beneficence. Employed independently, these principles can be limiting and may not accommodate the nuanced narrative of patients who lack decisional capacity but have expressed clear preferences about where they wish to live. Utilizing case-based discussion, this article explores how the inclusion of Robert Perske's dignity of risk principal in bioethics consultation can support clinicians in expanding their conceptions of beneficence and safety, providing the team with the freedom to craft discharge plans that keep the patient at the center of the narrative.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54627,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives in Biology and Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives in Biology and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2022.0019\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives in Biology and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2022.0019","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医院在监管和道德上都有责任为所有病人制定安全的出院计划。当临床医生和患者对安全性和最佳利益有不同的概念时,这些计划可能成为他们之间冲突的根源。在生物伦理学原则中,这种冲突可以被描述为病人根据自己的价值观或自主作出医疗决定的权利与临床医生为病人提供最佳护理的义务或慈善之间的紧张关系。如果单独使用,这些原则可能会有局限性,而且可能无法适应那些缺乏决策能力但对自己希望居住的地方表达了明确偏好的患者的细微叙述。利用基于案例的讨论,本文探讨了如何将Robert Perske的风险尊严原则纳入生物伦理咨询,以支持临床医生扩展他们的慈善和安全概念,为团队提供自由制定出院计划,使患者处于叙述的中心。
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
A Place of His Own: Applying Dignity of Risk to Bioethics Consultation.

Hospitals have both a regulatory and an ethical mandate to craft a safe discharge plan for all patients. These plans can become a source of conflict between clinicians and patients when they have differing conceptions of safety and best interests. In bioethics principles this conflict can be characterized as the tension between the patient's right to make medical decisions in accordance with their values, or autonomy, and the clinician's obligation to provide best care to their patients, or beneficence. Employed independently, these principles can be limiting and may not accommodate the nuanced narrative of patients who lack decisional capacity but have expressed clear preferences about where they wish to live. Utilizing case-based discussion, this article explores how the inclusion of Robert Perske's dignity of risk principal in bioethics consultation can support clinicians in expanding their conceptions of beneficence and safety, providing the team with the freedom to craft discharge plans that keep the patient at the center of the narrative.

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
Perspectives in Biology and Medicine
Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 医学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, an interdisciplinary scholarly journal whose readers include biologists, physicians, students, and scholars, publishes essays that place important biological or medical subjects in broader scientific, social, or humanistic contexts. These essays span a wide range of subjects, from biomedical topics such as neurobiology, genetics, and evolution, to topics in ethics, history, philosophy, and medical education and practice. The editors encourage an informal style that has literary merit and that preserves the warmth, excitement, and color of the biological and medical sciences.
期刊最新文献
Organismal Superposition and Death "Inherently Limited by Our Imaginations": Health Anxieties, Politics, and the History of the Climate Crisis Diagnosis: What Is the Structure of Its Reasoning? Valuing the Acute Subjective Experience Lived Religion in Religious Vaccine Exemptions
×
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