Responding to a Non-Imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Kelsey Gipe
{"title":"Responding to a Non-Imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation.","authors":"Kelsey Gipe","doi":"10.1017/S0963180124000173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Based on Nathan Goldstein's case report, \"But I have a pacer…there is no point in engaging in hypothetical scenarios\": A Non-imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation, it is reasonable to conclude that it was, all-things-considered, ethically appropriate to grant the patient's request to deactivate her pacemaker. Philosophically, and as a clinical bioethicist, I support the team's decision to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation. However, it is worth exploring a bit further whether the distress on the part of the outside hospital's ethics committee and providers-who declined to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation-may actually track something of moral significance. Might their discomfort around deactivation be \"truth-tracking\" in moral terms?</p>","PeriodicalId":55300,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-2"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180124000173","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Based on Nathan Goldstein's case report, "But I have a pacer…there is no point in engaging in hypothetical scenarios": A Non-imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation, it is reasonable to conclude that it was, all-things-considered, ethically appropriate to grant the patient's request to deactivate her pacemaker. Philosophically, and as a clinical bioethicist, I support the team's decision to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation. However, it is worth exploring a bit further whether the distress on the part of the outside hospital's ethics committee and providers-who declined to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation-may actually track something of moral significance. Might their discomfort around deactivation be "truth-tracking" in moral terms?

回应非临终病人停用起搏器的请求。
根据 Nathan Goldstein 的病例报告 "但我有心脏起搏器......进行假设是没有意义的":一位非临终病人要求停用起搏器》一文,我们有理由得出结论:从所有方面考虑,同意病人停用起搏器的请求在伦理上是适当的。从哲学上讲,作为一名临床生物伦理学家,我支持医疗团队同意患者停用起搏器请求的决定。然而,值得进一步探讨的是,外院伦理委员会和医护人员拒绝满足患者停用起搏器的要求,他们的苦恼实际上是否具有道德意义。他们对停用起搏器的不安是否可能是道德意义上的 "真相追踪"?
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
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics is designed to address the challenges of biology, medicine and healthcare and to meet the needs of professionals serving on healthcare ethics committees in hospitals, nursing homes, hospices and rehabilitation centres. The aim of the journal is to serve as the international forum for the wide range of serious and urgent issues faced by members of healthcare ethics committees, physicians, nurses, social workers, clergy, lawyers and community representatives.
×
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