Olivia Silva, Diana Jaber, Anthony Chiu, Cyrus Adams-Mardi, Edward Wicht
{"title":"Depression and Capacity to Withdraw from Dialysis.","authors":"Olivia Silva, Diana Jaber, Anthony Chiu, Cyrus Adams-Mardi, Edward Wicht","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A patient with a history of bipolar II disorder and end-stage renal disease who required hemodialysis for five years abruptly wished to withdraw from dialysis on day seven of her hospital admission for a urinary tract infection. She had never discussed wishing to withdraw from dialysis prior to this hospital admission. She had experienced several symptoms of depression during her stay. Her desire to withdraw from dialysis treatment was discordant with her previously expressed desires, and the psychiatry team determined that her judgment was likely altered by her depressive episode. Given her previous positive response to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), the psychiatry team recommended that she receive ECT before she choose to withdraw from dialysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":"33 3","pages":"240-244"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"33470064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Georgina D Campelia, James N Kirkpatrick, Patsie D Treece, Jamie L Shirley, Denise M Dudzinski
{"title":"Discharging to the Street: When Patients Refuse Medically Safer Options.","authors":"Georgina D Campelia, James N Kirkpatrick, Patsie D Treece, Jamie L Shirley, Denise M Dudzinski","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The ethical obligation to provide a reasonably safe discharge option from the inpatient setting is often confounded by the context of homelessness. Living without the security of stable housing is a known determinant of poor health, often complicating the safety of discharge and causing unnecessary readmission. But clinicians do not have significant control over unjust distributions of resources or inadequate societal investment in social services. While physicians may stretch inpatient stays beyond acute care need in the interest of their patients who are experiencing homelessness, they must also consider the implications of using an inpatient hospital bed for someone without the attendant level of medical need. Caring for patients in an inpatient setting when they no longer require acute care means fewer beds for acute care patients. And when a patient who is experiencing homelessness declines a medically safer option such as a skilled nursing facility, then clinicians may be faced with the sole option of discharge to the street, which raises troubling questions of nonmaleficence and social justice. Here we investigate the different forms of injustice that play out when patients are discharged to the street, and offer a map of the interwoven ethical responsibilities of clinicians, hospitals, and skilled nursing facilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"92-100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40193494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Medical Decision Making and the Previvor.","authors":"Valerie Gutmann Koch","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Genetic testing has led to the establishment of the concept of the \"previvor\": someone who is not yet sick, but who has a genetic predisposition to disease. The previvor experience demonstrates how the practice of medicine and medical decision making is evolving to render current law and policy increasingly inapplicable to modern medical practice. The introduction of previvorship to the medical landscape raises special issues for the physician-patient relationship and the legal doctrine of informed consent. It challenges some of the most basic assumptions underlying the doctrine, is representative of the doctrine's declining utility, and is illustrative of the need to transition to a shared decision-making model. Thus, we should begin to envision a legal doctrine that supports a robust shared decision-making approach to address individual preferences and values, the increasing complexity of risk/benefit assessment, and inherent (and sometimes irreducible) uncertainty. Such an approach should emphasize a new, more expansive, and inclusive model of illness.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"141-145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40193498","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Marika Warren, Christy Simpson, Diane Godkin, Allen Alvarez, Amanda Porter
{"title":"Convergence and Divergence in Canadian Ethics Support Services.","authors":"Marika Warren, Christy Simpson, Diane Godkin, Allen Alvarez, Amanda Porter","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article discusses clinical ethics consultation (CEC), and thereby ethics support services in the Canadian context. Commonalities and differences between the three models of ethics support and CEC shared in this article are identified, set within the broader context of the Canadian healthcare system, accreditation, and professionalization of practicing healthcare ethicists.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":"33 3","pages":"225-235"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"33479503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Values Imposition and Ethical Pluralism: An Argument Against Standardized Ethical Directives for Healthcare Ethics Consultants.","authors":"Autumn Fiester","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the article \"An Argument for Standardized Ethical Directives for Secular Healthcare Services,\" Abram L. Brummett and Jamie C. Watson argue that, parallel to the directives of the Roman Catholic Church, secular healthcare ethics consultants (HECs) need substantive standardized ethical guidelines (what they call SEGs) that would constitute a best practice across all HECs in the U.S. Brummett and Watson believe that the absence of such directives constitutes an important deficit in clinical ethics consultation (CEC) that needs to be rectified in order for consultation to achieve the professionalism and universality necessary for legitimacy. This is a bold argument worthy of consideration, perhaps most because it challenges the field to engage in a self-assessment about its current and future directions against the backdrop of both the concerning data on national CEC and the current intense values polarization in the U.S. As part of assessment, I will argue in this essay that such a consensus document is not only impossible in our current national climate, but undesirable given the way that it would impose liberal clinical ethics values on an extremely values-pluralistic populace and exacerbate the deep divisions that many of us fear could be our national undoing.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":"33 3","pages":"189-197"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"33479052","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Responding to Fiester's Critique of a Bioethical Consensus Project.","authors":"Abram L Brummett, Jamie C Watson","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We respond to Autumn Fiester's critique that our proposed bioethical consensus project amounts to \"ethical hegemony,\" and evaluate her claim that ethicists should restrict themselves to \"mere process\" recommendations. We argue that content recommendations are an inescapable aspect of clinical ethics consultation, and our primary concern is that, without standardization of bioethical consensus, our field will vacillate among appeals to the disparate claims in the 22 \"Core References,\" unsustainable efforts to defend value-neutral process recommendations, or become a practice of Lone Ranger clinical ethicists. We contend that a consensus document that captures the basic moral commitments of patients and careproviders is the next step in the professional evolution of our field.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":"33 3","pages":"198-201"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"33479053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Clinical Medical Ethics: How Did We Start? Where Are We Heading?","authors":"Bernard Lo","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The author presents his view of the start of clinical medical ethics and ideas on where the broader field of bioethics is heading. In addition to clinical medical ethics, people with training in clinical ethics can enlarge the scope of their work in order to have additional real-world impact. Important opportunities abound in empirical research on medical ethics, the ethics of healthcare institutions, ethical issues regarding biomedical research, and public policy. Three topics for bioethics scholars to address are artificial intelligence in clinical care, health disparities, and communicating persuasively to broader audiences beyond academia.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"124-129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40193496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Ethics of Distrust: The Balancing of Perspectives Is Crucial in Surrogate Decision Making and Mediation.","authors":"Shahla Siddiqui","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the case described here, an often recurring and unresolved scenario is presented where communication issues are underpinned by pre-existing perceptions of mistrust between the caregivers and the surrogate family members in the intensive care unit. Racial factors play into this mistrust, when a family feel that their loved one is \"yet again\" not being treated in the best way possible. The perspectives of all stakeholders are considered in the discussion and relevant literature is cited.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":"33 3","pages":"245-248"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"33470065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Effectiveness of Advance Care Planning: What Works, What Doesn't, and What Needs to Change?","authors":"Susan W Tolle, Katrina Hedberg","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>An increasing recognition over the past five decades of the importance of patients' autonomy and the right to be able to choose to limit medical treatment at the end of life has led to the development of a number of documents related to advance care planning, including the advance directive, medical power of attorney, and portable orders for life-sustaining treatment (POLST). While these documents are important aspects of advance care planning, without having goals-of-care conversations, a specific plan, and necessary supports to achieve these goals, the documents alone offer a false promise. Healthcare professionals must be trained on how to have indepth goals-of-care conversations with patients and their families, and effectively document the decisions. Advance care planning needs to be viewed as a process that must continue as the patient's health status, social support system, and living environment change. Designating a healthcare representative who participates in goals-of-care conversations and can work with the healthcare team to make \"just in time\" decisions about care reduces the burden and stress on friends and family. In this article we discuss the strengths and limitations of advance directives, medical power of attorney forms, and POLST forms; propose concrete changes to optimize the effectiveness of each; and present a comprehensive approach to advance care planning that we hope will improve care for those nearing the end of life, and ensure that their wishes and goals to have or to limit treatment are more consistently honored.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":"33 3","pages":"210-219"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"33479501","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Seeing the Invisible.","authors":"Edmund G Howe","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article focuses on three different ways that we may demean people by seeing them as less than they are, and describes ways we may best avoid doing this. More specifically, I explain how we may not see the physical and emotional issues that plague patients and others. This may be because they choose not to disclose their difficulties to us. We may also err when we see only one aspect of who and how others are. These challenges pose ethical quandaries that involve equity, improved communication with patients, and subjecting ethical principles to empirical study before we adopt them. I explore the means to do these.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"81-91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40193493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}