Getting rights right: implementing 'Martha's Rule'.

IF 3.3 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Mackenzie Graham, Isabel Hanson, James Hart, Peter Young, Sapfo Lignou, Michael J Parker, Mark Sheehan
{"title":"Getting rights right: implementing 'Martha's Rule'.","authors":"Mackenzie Graham, Isabel Hanson, James Hart, Peter Young, Sapfo Lignou, Michael J Parker, Mark Sheehan","doi":"10.1136/jme-2023-109650","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The UK government has recently committed to adopting a new policy-dubbed 'Martha's Rule'-which has been characterised as providing patients the right to rapidly access a second clinical opinion in urgent or contested cases. Support for the rule emerged following the death of Martha Mills in 2021, after doctors failed to admit her to intensive care despite concerns raised by her parents. We argue that framing this issue in terms of patient rights is not productive, and should be avoided. Insofar as the ultimate goal of Martha's Rule is the provision of a clinical service that protects patient safety, an approach that focuses on the obligations of the health system-rather than the individual rights of patients-will better serve this goal. We outline an alternative approach that situates rapid clinical review as part of a suite of services aimed at enhancing and protecting patient care. This approach would make greater progress towards addressing the difficult systemic issues that Martha's Rule does not, while also better engaging with the constraints of clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":16317,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"151-155"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2023-109650","RegionNum":2,"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

Abstract

The UK government has recently committed to adopting a new policy-dubbed 'Martha's Rule'-which has been characterised as providing patients the right to rapidly access a second clinical opinion in urgent or contested cases. Support for the rule emerged following the death of Martha Mills in 2021, after doctors failed to admit her to intensive care despite concerns raised by her parents. We argue that framing this issue in terms of patient rights is not productive, and should be avoided. Insofar as the ultimate goal of Martha's Rule is the provision of a clinical service that protects patient safety, an approach that focuses on the obligations of the health system-rather than the individual rights of patients-will better serve this goal. We outline an alternative approach that situates rapid clinical review as part of a suite of services aimed at enhancing and protecting patient care. This approach would make greater progress towards addressing the difficult systemic issues that Martha's Rule does not, while also better engaging with the constraints of clinical practice.

正确对待权利:实施 "玛莎规则"。
英国政府最近承诺将采取一项新政策,被称为 "玛莎规则"(Martha's Rule),旨在为患者提供在紧急情况或有争议的情况下迅速获得第二临床意见的权利。2021 年玛莎-米尔斯(Martha Mills)去世后,尽管她的父母提出了疑虑,但医生仍未将她送入重症监护室,因此出现了对该规则的支持。我们认为,从患者权利的角度来阐述这一问题并无益处,应予以避免。只要玛莎规则的最终目标是提供保护患者安全的临床服务,那么关注医疗系统义务而非患者个人权利的方法就能更好地实现这一目标。我们概述了另一种方法,即把快速临床审查作为旨在加强和保护患者护理的一整套服务的一部分。这种方法将在解决困难的系统性问题方面取得更大进展,而玛莎规则却没有做到这一点,同时还能更好地应对临床实践的限制。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
164
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Ethics is a leading international journal that reflects the whole field of medical ethics. The journal seeks to promote ethical reflection and conduct in scientific research and medical practice. It features articles on various ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and patients. Subscribers to the Journal of Medical Ethics also receive Medical Humanities journal at no extra cost. JME is the official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信