Family Systems Care ‒ Expert consensus on ethics behind committed practice.

IF 2.9 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Corina Sgier, Margrit Hilpertshauser, Mirjam Mezger, Melanie Werren
{"title":"Family Systems Care ‒ Expert consensus on ethics behind committed practice.","authors":"Corina Sgier, Margrit Hilpertshauser, Mirjam Mezger, Melanie Werren","doi":"10.1177/09697330251339060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundEthically challenging situations often arise in interactions between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and families. Although the Calgary models offer guidance for practical work and are beneficial in various challenging situations, explicit awareness and recognition of the ethical concepts and theories underlying Family Systems Care (FSC) is generally lacking.Method - Research aimThis study examined the basis of FSC in virtue ethics, deontology, and teleology.Research designUtilizing a qualitative design, an expert consensus was conducted through two focus group interviews, a Delphi group, and an expert panel.Participants and research contextThe expert consensus consisted of 23 professionals in FSC from various specialities, including nurses (<i>n</i> = 18), midwives (<i>n</i> = 4), and a general practitioner, who explored ethical considerations in clinical practice.Ethical considerationsThe research project was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of participants' informed consent and the Declaration of Helsinki.FindingsParticipants recognized the significance of classical virtues such as faith, fortitude, hope, and caritas in FSC. They emphasized that these virtues not only guide HCPs in their practice but also empower families to rediscover their strengths amid suffering. Additionally, the integration of deontological principles and teleological perspectives highlighted the importance of balancing individual and collective well-being, and fostering compassionate relationships while navigating ethical complexities in therapeutic conversations.ConclusionThis study highlights the importance of virtue ethics, deontology, and teleology in guiding HCPs' moral reasoning within FSC. Participants emphasized respect and appreciation as essential values for maintaining trust with families during ethical challenges. By integrating ethical theories into practice, HCPs can navigate complex situations effectively, fostering compassionate and dignified care.</p>","PeriodicalId":49729,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"9697330251339060"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330251339060","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

Abstract

BackgroundEthically challenging situations often arise in interactions between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and families. Although the Calgary models offer guidance for practical work and are beneficial in various challenging situations, explicit awareness and recognition of the ethical concepts and theories underlying Family Systems Care (FSC) is generally lacking.Method - Research aimThis study examined the basis of FSC in virtue ethics, deontology, and teleology.Research designUtilizing a qualitative design, an expert consensus was conducted through two focus group interviews, a Delphi group, and an expert panel.Participants and research contextThe expert consensus consisted of 23 professionals in FSC from various specialities, including nurses (n = 18), midwives (n = 4), and a general practitioner, who explored ethical considerations in clinical practice.Ethical considerationsThe research project was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of participants' informed consent and the Declaration of Helsinki.FindingsParticipants recognized the significance of classical virtues such as faith, fortitude, hope, and caritas in FSC. They emphasized that these virtues not only guide HCPs in their practice but also empower families to rediscover their strengths amid suffering. Additionally, the integration of deontological principles and teleological perspectives highlighted the importance of balancing individual and collective well-being, and fostering compassionate relationships while navigating ethical complexities in therapeutic conversations.ConclusionThis study highlights the importance of virtue ethics, deontology, and teleology in guiding HCPs' moral reasoning within FSC. Participants emphasized respect and appreciation as essential values for maintaining trust with families during ethical challenges. By integrating ethical theories into practice, HCPs can navigate complex situations effectively, fostering compassionate and dignified care.

家庭系统护理-专家共识的道德背后承诺的做法。
在医疗保健专业人员(HCPs)和家庭之间的互动中经常出现道德挑战情况。尽管卡尔加里模式为实际工作提供了指导,并且在各种具有挑战性的情况下是有益的,但对家庭系统护理(FSC)的伦理概念和理论的明确认识和认可通常是缺乏的。本研究考察了道德伦理、义务论和目的论中FSC的基础。研究设计采用定性设计,通过两次焦点小组访谈、德尔菲小组和专家小组来达成专家共识。专家共识由来自不同专业的23名FSC专业人员组成,包括护士(n = 18),助产士(n = 4)和一名全科医生,他们探讨了临床实践中的伦理问题。伦理考虑本研究项目是按照参与者知情同意和赫尔辛基宣言的伦理原则进行的。参与者认识到FSC中传统美德的重要性,如信仰、坚韧、希望和博爱。他们强调,这些美德不仅指导医护人员的实践,而且使家庭能够在痛苦中重新发现自己的力量。此外,义务论原则和目的论观点的整合强调了平衡个人和集体福祉的重要性,以及在治疗对话中引导伦理复杂性的同时培养富有同情心的关系。结论本研究强调了美德伦理、义务论和目的论在指导FSC内医护人员道德推理中的重要性。与会者强调,尊重和欣赏是在道德挑战中与家庭保持信任的基本价值观。通过将伦理理论整合到实践中,医护人员可以有效地应对复杂的情况,培养富有同情心和尊严的护理。
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
Nursing Ethics
Nursing Ethics 医学-护理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
11.90%
发文量
117
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing Ethics takes a practical approach to this complex subject and relates each topic to the working environment. The articles on ethical and legal issues are written in a comprehensible style and official documents are analysed in a user-friendly way. The international Editorial Board ensures the selection of a wide range of high quality articles of global significance.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信