A Clinician's Guide to Ethical Challenges in Discharge Planning: Proportionality, Risk, and Justice.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
George Chengxi Bao, Sydney Katz, Debjani Mukherjee, Ezra Gabbay
{"title":"A Clinician's Guide to Ethical Challenges in Discharge Planning: Proportionality, Risk, and Justice.","authors":"George Chengxi Bao, Sydney Katz, Debjani Mukherjee, Ezra Gabbay","doi":"10.1016/j.amjmed.2025.06.032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Discharge planning often presents clinicians with ethical dilemmas. Because most clinicians lack formal training in ethics or have limited access to ethics consultation, we propose a pragmatic framework to address them. Our recommendations are based on a review of PubMed articles on ethics and adult inpatient discharge planning from January 2000 to May 2025. Ethical challenges can be categorized into two principal types: autonomy-related challenges, which arise when patients reject the clinical team's recommendations for safe discharge, and distributive justice-related challenges, which occur when resource allocation constraints affect discharge planning. Possible solutions emerge when applying the principle of proportionality to find a correct balance between the competing ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. Such balance is inherently subjective, context-dependent, and arrived at through shared, deliberative decision-making. Finding proportionate balance is also error-prone, requiring continual reassessment through a reflective process that recognizes biases from healthcare policy and economic drivers.</p>","PeriodicalId":50807,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2025.06.032","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Discharge planning often presents clinicians with ethical dilemmas. Because most clinicians lack formal training in ethics or have limited access to ethics consultation, we propose a pragmatic framework to address them. Our recommendations are based on a review of PubMed articles on ethics and adult inpatient discharge planning from January 2000 to May 2025. Ethical challenges can be categorized into two principal types: autonomy-related challenges, which arise when patients reject the clinical team's recommendations for safe discharge, and distributive justice-related challenges, which occur when resource allocation constraints affect discharge planning. Possible solutions emerge when applying the principle of proportionality to find a correct balance between the competing ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. Such balance is inherently subjective, context-dependent, and arrived at through shared, deliberative decision-making. Finding proportionate balance is also error-prone, requiring continual reassessment through a reflective process that recognizes biases from healthcare policy and economic drivers.

临床医生在出院计划中的道德挑战指南:比例、风险和正义。
出院计划经常给临床医生带来道德困境。由于大多数临床医生缺乏正式的伦理培训或获得伦理咨询的机会有限,我们提出了一个务实的框架来解决这些问题。我们的建议是基于2000年1月至2025年5月PubMed关于伦理和成人住院病人出院计划的文章的综述。伦理挑战可以分为两种主要类型:与自主性相关的挑战,当患者拒绝临床团队的安全出院建议时出现;与分配正义相关的挑战,当资源分配限制影响出院计划时出现。当运用比例原则在自治、仁慈、无害和正义等相互竞争的伦理原则之间找到正确的平衡时,可能的解决方案就出现了。这种平衡本质上是主观的,依赖于环境的,并且是通过共享的、深思熟虑的决策来实现的。寻找适当的平衡也容易出错,需要通过反思过程不断重新评估,认识到医疗政策和经济驱动因素的偏见。
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
American Journal of Medicine
American Journal of Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
3.40%
发文量
449
审稿时长
9 days
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Medicine - "The Green Journal" - publishes original clinical research of interest to physicians in internal medicine, both in academia and community-based practice. AJM is the official journal of the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine, a prestigious group comprising internal medicine department chairs at more than 125 medical schools across the U.S. Each issue carries useful reviews as well as seminal articles of immediate interest to the practicing physician, including peer-reviewed, original scientific studies that have direct clinical significance and position papers on health care issues, medical education, and public policy.
×
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