Monash Bioethics Review最新文献_第5页

Suicide-preventive compulsory admission is not a proportionate measure – time for clinicians to recognise the associated risks 预防自杀的强制入院措施并不相称--临床医生该认识到相关风险了

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2024-04-13 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-024-00190-6

Antoinette Lundahl

引用次数: 0

Cause for coercion: cause for concern? 胁迫的原因：令人担忧的原因？

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2024-02-13 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-024-00187-1

Maxwell J Smith

{"title":"Cause for coercion: cause for concern?","authors":"Maxwell J Smith","doi":"10.1007/s40592-024-00187-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-024-00187-1","url":null,"abstract":"In his 2000 book, From Chaos to Coercion: Detention and the Control of Tuberculosis, Richard Coker makes a number of important observations and arguments regarding the use of coercive public health measures in response to infectious disease threats. In particular, Coker argues that we have a tendency to neglect public health threats and then demand immediate action, which can leave policymakers with fewer effective options and may require (or may be perceived as requiring) more aggressive, coercive measures to achieve public health goals. While Coker makes a convincing case as to why we should find it ethically problematic when governments find themselves in this position and resort to coercion, left outstanding is the question of whether this should preclude governments and health authorities from using coercion if and when they do find themselves in this position. In this paper, I argue that, while we should consider it ethically objectionable when governments resort to coercion because they have neglected a public health threat, its causes, and other possible responses to that threat, this should not then necessarily rule out the use of coercion in such circumstances; that there are ethically objectionable antecedents for why coercion is being considered should not necessarily or automatically cause us to think coercion in such cases cannot be justified. I address an objection to this argument and draw several conclusions about how governments' use of coercion in public health should be evaluated.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139724387","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

How to love animals: and protect our planet Henry Mance New York: Vintage Books, 2022; paperback, 400 pp., £9.99, ISBN: 9781529112146. 如何爱护动物：保护我们的地球》亨利-曼斯纽约：平装本，400 页，9.99 英镑，ISBN：9781529112146。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2023-12-21 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-023-00185-9

B V E Hyde

引用次数: 0

Defending the de dicto approach to the non-identity problem. 为解决非同一性问题的专制方法辩护。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-26 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-023-00177-9

Joona Räsänen

引用次数: 0

A review of G. R. McLean, ethical basics for the caring professions: knowledge and skills for thoughtful practice (1st ed. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2022. 240 p.). G.R.McLean，《护理职业的伦理基础：深思熟虑的实践的知识和技能》（第1版，Abingdon，Oxon:Routledge，2022）。240页）。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-04 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-023-00184-w

Michael Shepanski

引用次数: 0

Resistance and the delivery of healthcare in Australian immigration detention centres. 澳大利亚移民拘留中心的抵抗和医疗服务。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-09 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-023-00182-y

Ryan Essex, Michael Dudley

{"title":"Resistance and the delivery of healthcare in Australian immigration detention centres.","authors":"Ryan Essex, Michael Dudley","doi":"10.1007/s40592-023-00182-y","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40592-023-00182-y","url":null,"abstract":"There are few issues that have been as vexing for the Australian healthcare community as the Australian governments policy of mandatory, indefinite, immigration detention. While many concepts have been used to begin to describe the many dilemmas faced by healthcare professionals and their resolution, they are limited, perhaps most fundamentally by the fact that immigration detention is antithetical to health and wellbeing. Furthermore, and while most advice recognises that the abolition of detention is the only option in overcoming these issues, it provides little guidance on how action within detention could contribute to this. Drawing on the work of political theorists and the broader sociological literature, we will introduce and apply a form of action that has not yet been considered for healthcare workers within detention, resistance. We will draw on several examples from the literature to show how everyday resistance could be enacted in healthcare and immigration detention settings. We argue that the concept of resistance has several conceptual and practical advantages over much existing guidance for healthcare workers in these environments, namely that it politicises care and has synergies with other efforts aimed at the abolition of detention. We also offer some reflections on the justifiability of such action, arguing that it is largely consistent with the existing guidance produced by all major healthcare bodies in Australia.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":"82-95"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10754717/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41147644","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

Taking embodiment seriously in public policy and practice: adopting a procedural approach to health and welfare. 在公共政策和实践中认真体现：对健康和福利采取程序性方法。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-04 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-023-00183-x

Joseph T F Roberts

{"title":"Taking embodiment seriously in public policy and practice: adopting a procedural approach to health and welfare.","authors":"Joseph T F Roberts","doi":"10.1007/s40592-023-00183-x","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40592-023-00183-x","url":null,"abstract":"It is a common refrain amongst phenomenologists, disability theorists, and feminist legal theorists that medical practice pays insufficient attention to people's embodiment. The complaint that we take insufficient account of people's embodiment isn't limited to the clinical interaction. It has also been directed at healthcare regulation and welfare policy. In this paper, I examine the arguments for taking embodiment seriously in both medical practice and welfare policy, concluding we have good reasons to take better account of people's embodiment. I then set out two challenges to taking embodiment seriously in public policy. First, given the amount of variation in how people are embodied, there is strong possibility that adjusting policy to benefit particular individuals based on an appreciation of their embodied experiences could be detrimental towards other individuals. The second challenge concerns how to ensure that people's testimony about their first-person embodied experience is subject to adequate scrutiny without this resulting in epistemic injustice. I argue that the solution to both of these challenges is to devise a just procedure for soliciting people's testimony and taking it into account in the policy development process. As such, I also provide an outline of what a just procedure should look like.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":"20-48"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10754762/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71487171","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

How did organ donation in Israel become a club membership model? From civic to communal solidarity in organ sharing. 以色列的器官捐献是如何变成俱乐部会员制模式的？器官共享从公民团结到社区团结。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-09 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-023-00179-7

Hagai Boas

{"title":"How did organ donation in Israel become a club membership model? From civic to communal solidarity in organ sharing.","authors":"Hagai Boas","doi":"10.1007/s40592-023-00179-7","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40592-023-00179-7","url":null,"abstract":"Figuring out what pushes individuals to become organ donors has become the holy grail of social scientists interested in transplantations. In this paper I concentrate on solidarity as a determinant of organ donation and examine it through the history of organ donation in Israel. By following the history of transplantation policies since 1968 and examining them in relation to different types of solidarities, this paper leads to a nuanced understanding of the ties between solidarity and health policy. Attempts to foster an all-encompassing consensus on the definition of brain death yielded the Transplantation and the Brain-Respiratory Death Laws of 2008. It was hoped that a wide \"civic solidarity\" would render Israel self-sufficient in its organ economy. However, the failure of the law led to the breakdown of civic solidarity in organ donation. As a result, initiatives such as the priority policy and non-directed living organ donations, developed out of a narrower conception of solidarity. Juxtaposing these initiatives sheds light on macro level processes for policy makers and suggests solidarity as a key bioethical concept to understand organ donation policies.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":"49-65"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10754737/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10193526","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

Respecting living kidney donor autonomy: an argument for liberalising living kidney donor acceptance criteria. 尊重活体肾供者的自主权:放宽活体肾供者接受标准的论点。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-09 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-022-00166-4

Alison C Weightman, Simon Coghlan, Philip A Clayton

{"title":"Respecting living kidney donor autonomy: an argument for liberalising living kidney donor acceptance criteria.","authors":"Alison C Weightman, Simon Coghlan, Philip A Clayton","doi":"10.1007/s40592-022-00166-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40592-022-00166-4","url":null,"abstract":"Doctors routinely refuse donation offers from prospective living kidney donors with certain comorbidities such as diabetes or obesity out of concern for donor wellbeing. This refusal occurs despite the ongoing shortage of kidney transplants and the superior performance of living donor kidney transplants compared to those from deceased donors. In this paper, we argue that this paternalistic refusal by doctors is unjustified and that, within limits, there should be greater acceptance of such donations. We begin by describing possible weak and strong paternalistic justifications of current conservative donor acceptance guidelines and practices. We then justify our position by outlining the frequently under-recognised benefits and the routinely overestimated harms of such donation, before discussing the need to respect the autonomy of willing donors with certain comorbidities. Finally, we respond to a number of possible objections to our proposal for more liberal kidney donor acceptance criteria. We use the situation in Australia as our case study, but our argument is applicable to comparable situations around the world.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":"156-173"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10654180/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10370539","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: 1

The relationship between speculation and translation in Bioethics: methods and methodologies. 生物伦理学中思辨与翻译的关系：方法论与方法论。

IF 1.6

Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-28 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-023-00181-z

Tess Johnson, Elizabeth Chloe Romanis

{"title":"The relationship between speculation and translation in Bioethics: methods and methodologies.","authors":"Tess Johnson, Elizabeth Chloe Romanis","doi":"10.1007/s40592-023-00181-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40592-023-00181-z","url":null,"abstract":"There are increasing pressures for bioethics to emphasise 'translation'. Against this backdrop, we defend 'speculative bioethics'. We explore speculation as an important tool and line of bioethical inquiry. Further, we examine the relationship between speculation and translational bioethics and posit that speculation can support translational work. First, speculative research might be conducted as ethical analysis of contemporary issues through a new lens, in which case it supports translational work. Second, speculation might be a first step prior to translational work on a topic. Finally, speculative bioethics might constitute different content altogether, without translational objectives. For each conception of speculative bioethics, important methodological aspects determine whether it constitutes good bioethics research. We conclude that whether speculative bioethics is compatible with translational bioethics-and to what extent-depends on whether it is being employed as tool or content. Applying standards of impact uniformly across bioethics may inappropriately limit speculative bioethics.","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10754718/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41152926","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