Monash Bioethics Review最新文献_第10页

50 Years of advance care planning: what do we call success? 50年的提前护理计划:我们怎么称呼成功?

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2021-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-05-08 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-021-00127-3

Kerstin Knight

{"title":"50 Years of advance care planning: what do we call success?","authors":"Kerstin Knight","doi":"10.1007/s40592-021-00127-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-021-00127-3","url":null,"abstract":"Advance care planning (ACP) is promoted as beneficial practice internationally. This article critically examines different ways of understanding and measuring success in ACP. It has been 50 years since Luis Kutner first published his original idea of the Living Will, which was thought to be a contract between health carers and patients to provide for instructions about treatment choices in cases of mental incapacity. Its purpose was to extend a patient's right to autonomy and protect health carers from charges of wrong-doing. Yet, it can be doubtful whether different types of ACP achieve these goals rather than aiming at secondary gains. My discussion suggests that the current promotion of ACP is not always engaging critically with the original ACP intentions and may even pursue notions of success that may run contrary to respecting autonomy. The risk of this may especially be the case when high participation rates are taken as indicators of success for institutional ACP programs. I further suggest that Kutner's two original aims of protecting patient autonomy and preventing charges of wrong-doing are near impossible to achieve in conjunction, because their simultaneous pursuit fails to acknowledge that patients and carers have opposing needs for reassurance about possible judgment errors. I conclude that the most realistic idea of success of modern ACP is an acknowledgement of the importance of ongoing dialogue about what constitutes appropriate care and a diversity of aims rather than any kind of advance, contractual insurance in the face of controversy.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":"39 1","pages":"28-50"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40592-021-00127-3","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38960290","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}

引用次数: 5

Human research ethics committees members: ethical review personal perceptions. 人类研究伦理委员会成员:伦理审查个人看法。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2021-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-06-25 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-021-00130-8

Boris Handal, Chris Campbell, Kevin Watson, Marguerite Maher, Keagan Brewer, Anne-Marie Irwin, Marc Fellman

{"title":"Human research ethics committees members: ethical review personal perceptions.","authors":"Boris Handal, Chris Campbell, Kevin Watson, Marguerite Maher, Keagan Brewer, Anne-Marie Irwin, Marc Fellman","doi":"10.1007/s40592-021-00130-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-021-00130-8","url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to characterise Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) members' perceptions on five main themes associated with ethics reviews, namely, the nature of research, ethical/moral issues, assent, participants' risk and HREC prerogatives issues. Three hundred and sixteen HREC members from over 200 HRECs throughout Australia responded to an online questionnaire survey. The results show that in general, HREC members' beliefs are reasoned and align with sound principles of ethical reviews. There seems to be a disposition for living up to ethical/moral values, avoiding the issue of consent waivers and respecting participants' welfare, as well as a sense of ambiguity about HREC prerogatives. Problematic areas were a tendency towards over-valuing quantitative research methods for their perceived validity and a neutral view on issuing consent waivers to participants with intellectual disability and, finally, the belief that research that limits disclosure, plans deception or actively conceals is morally unjustifiable. Implications for professional development and policy-making are discussed.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":"39 1","pages":"94-114"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40592-021-00130-8","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39107285","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}

引用次数: 1

Changing the channel on medical ethics education: systematic review and qualitative analysis of didactic-icebreakers in medical ethics and professionalism teaching. 改变医学伦理教育的渠道：对医学伦理和职业精神教学中的破题者进行系统回顾和定性分析。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2021-07-01 Epub Date: 2020-10-17 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-020-00120-2

Abbas Rattani, Dalia Kaakour, Raafay H Syed, Abdul-Hadi Kaakour

{"title":"Changing the channel on medical ethics education: systematic review and qualitative analysis of didactic-icebreakers in medical ethics and professionalism teaching.","authors":"Abbas Rattani, Dalia Kaakour, Raafay H Syed, Abdul-Hadi Kaakour","doi":"10.1007/s40592-020-00120-2","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40592-020-00120-2","url":null,"abstract":"As medical ethics and professionalism education continues to equip medical students and residents with long-lasting tools, educators should continue to supplement proven teaching strategies with engaging, relatable, and generationally appropriate didactic supplements. However, popular teaching aids have recently been criticized in the literature and summative information on alternatives is absent. The purpose of this review is to evaluate and assess the functional use and application of short form audiovisual didactic supplements or \"icebreakers\" in medical ethics and professionalism teaching. A systematic review of both the medical and humanities literature (i.e., PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and JSTOR) was conducted from inception to August 1, 2019. Final articles were subjected to a qualitative appraisal and thematic analysis. Thirteen articles were included for final analysis. Sixty-nine percent (n = 9) of the studies were published after 2000. Two studies were qualitative, one study was quantitative, and the remaining articles were commentaries. Short form audiovisual media was most popular outside of the United States (n = 10). Sixty-nine percent (n = 9) of articles advocated for self-contained media in the form of trigger films or short films/videos, while the remaining articles (n = 4) discussed the use of TV/film clips. Producibility of media was exclusive to short/trigger films. Nine themes were identified in the content analysis: adaptability, conversation catalyst, effective, engaging, nuance, practice, producibility, real, and subject diversity. The three most common themes in descending order of frequency were: conversation catalyst, realness, and adaptability. Trigger films represent an effective and unique pedagogical strategy in supplementing current medical ethics and professionalism teaching at the medical school level.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":"39 1","pages":"125-140"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38500862","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}

引用次数: 0

Can 'eugenics' be defended? “优生学”可以辩护吗?

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2021-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-05-25 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-021-00129-1

Walter Veit, Jonathan Anomaly, Nicholas Agar, Peter Singer, Diana S Fleischman, Francesca Minerva

引用次数: 12

Public perceptions on Controlled Human Infection Model (CHIM) studies-a qualitative pilot study from South India. 公众对受控人类感染模型(CHIM)研究的看法——一项来自南印度的定性试点研究。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2021-07-01 Epub Date: 2020-10-21 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-020-00121-1

Manjulika Vaz, Olinda Timms, Avita Rose Johnson, Rathna Kumari S, Mala Ramanathan, Mario Vaz

{"title":"Public perceptions on Controlled Human Infection Model (CHIM) studies-a qualitative pilot study from South India.","authors":"Manjulika Vaz, Olinda Timms, Avita Rose Johnson, Rathna Kumari S, Mala Ramanathan, Mario Vaz","doi":"10.1007/s40592-020-00121-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-020-00121-1","url":null,"abstract":"Research using Controlled Human Infection Models is yet to be attempted in India. This study was conducted to understand the perceptions of the lay public and key opinion makers prior to the possible introduction of such studies in the country. 110 respondents from urban and rural Bangalore district were interviewed using qualitative research methods of Focus Group Discussions and In-depth Interviews. The data was analyzed using grounded theory. Safety was a key concern of the lay public, expressed in terms of fear of death. The notion of infecting a healthy volunteer, the possibility of continued effects beyond the study duration and the likelihood of vulnerable populations volunteering solely for monetary benefit, were ethical concerns. Public good outcomes such as effective treatments, targeted vaccines and prevention of diseases was necessary justification for such studies. However, the comprehension of this benefit was not clear among non-medical, non-technical respondents and suggestions to seek alternatives to CHIMs repeatedly arose. There was a great deal of deflection-with each constituency feeling that people other than themselves may be ideally suited as participants. Risk takers, those without dependents, the more health and research literate, financially sound and those with an altruistic bent of mind emerged as possible CHIM volunteers. While widespread awareness and advocacy about CHIM is essential, listening to plural voices is the first step in public engagement in ethically contentious areas. Continued engagement and inclusive deliberative processes are required to redeem the mistrust of the public in research and rebuild faith in regulatory systems.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":"39 1","pages":"68-93"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40592-020-00121-1","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38513619","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

Radical enhancement as a moral status de-enhancer. 激进的强化是一种道德地位的削弱。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-020-00118-w

Jesse Gray

引用次数: 0

A general approach to compensation for losses incurred due to public health interventions in the infectious disease context. 在传染病方面，对公共卫生干预措施造成的损失进行补偿的一般方法。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-020-00104-2

Søren Holm

{"title":"A general approach to compensation for losses incurred due to public health interventions in the infectious disease context.","authors":"Søren Holm","doi":"10.1007/s40592-020-00104-2","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40592-020-00104-2","url":null,"abstract":"This paper develops a general approach to how society should compensate for losses that individuals incur due to public health interventions aimed at controlling the spread of infectious diseases. The paper falls in three parts. The first part provides an initial introduction to the issues and briefly outlines five different kinds of public health interventions that will be used as test cases. They are all directed at individuals and aimed at controlling the spread of infectious diseases (1) isolation, (2) quarantine, (3) recommended voluntary social distancing, (4) changes in health care provision for asymptomatic carriers of multi-resistant microorganisms, and (5) vaccination. The interventions will be briefly described including the various risks, burdens and harms individuals who are subject to these interventions may incur. The second part briefly surveys current compensation mechanisms as far as any exist and argue that even where they exist they are clearly insufficient and do not provide adequate compensation. The third part will then develop a general framework for compensation for losses incurred due to public health interventions in the infectious disease context. This is the major analytical and constructive part of the paper. It first analyses pragmatic and ethical arguments supporting the existence of an obligation on the part of the state to compensate for such losses, and then considers whether this obligation can be defeated by (1) resource considerations, or (2) issues relating to personal responsibility.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":"38 Suppl 1","pages":"32-46"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7095444/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"37705084","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Infection control measures in times of antimicrobial resistance: a matter of solidarity. 抗微生物药物耐药性时期的感染控制措施:一个团结的问题。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2020-12-01 Epub Date: 2020-11-07 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-020-00119-9

Babette Rump, Aura Timen, Marlies Hulscher, Marcel Verweij

引用次数: 3

Embryo experimentation: is there a case for moving beyond the '14-day rule'. 胚胎实验:是否有理由超越“14天规则”?

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-020-00117-x

Grant Castelyn

{"title":"Embryo experimentation: is there a case for moving beyond the '14-day rule'.","authors":"Grant Castelyn","doi":"10.1007/s40592-020-00117-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-020-00117-x","url":null,"abstract":"Recent scientific advances have indicated that it may be technically feasible to sustain human embryos in vitro beyond 14 days. Research beyond this stage is currently restricted by a guideline known as the 14-day rule. Since the advances in embryo culturing there have been calls to extend the current limit. Much of the current debate concerning an extension has regarded the 14-day rule as a political compromise and has, therefore, focused on policy concerns rather than assessing the philosophical foundations of the limit. While there are relevant political considerations, I maintain that the success of extension arguments will ultimately depend on the strength of the justifications supporting the current 14-day limit. I argue that the strongest and most prevalent justifications for the 14-day rule-an appeal to individuation and neural development-do not provide adequate support for the limit of 14 days. I instead suggest that an alternative justification based on sentience would constitute a more defensible basis for embryo protection and that a consideration of such grounds appears to support an amendment to the current limit, rather than the retention of it. While these conclusions do not establish conclusively that the current limit should be extended; they do suggest that an extension may be warranted and permissible. As such, this paper offers grounds on which a reassessment of the 14-day rule may be justified.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":"38 2","pages":"181-196"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40592-020-00117-x","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38216864","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}

引用次数: 7

Emerging moral status issues. 新兴的道德地位问题。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2020-12-01 Epub Date: 2020-12-04 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-020-00124-y

Julian J Koplin, Christopher Gyngell

引用次数: 4