常见精神障碍重返工作岗位干预中的合作:行为者、目标和伦理障碍的理想理论分析

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Thomas Hartvigsson, Lars Sandman, Gunnar Bergström, Elisabeth Björk Brämberg
{"title":"常见精神障碍重返工作岗位干预中的合作:行为者、目标和伦理障碍的理想理论分析","authors":"Thomas Hartvigsson, Lars Sandman, Gunnar Bergström, Elisabeth Björk Brämberg","doi":"10.1007/s10728-024-00491-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The rise in the number of people on sick leave for common mental disorders is a growing concern, both from a societal and individual perspective. One common suggestion to improve the return-to-work process is increased cooperation between the relevant parties, including at least the employer, the social insurance agency and health care. This suggestion is often made on the presumption that all parties share the common goal of reintegrating the patient-employee back into the workplace. In this paper we investigate this presumption by mapping out the ethical frameworks of these three key actors in any return-to-work process. We show that although the goals of these actors often, and to a large extent, overlap there are potential differences and tensions between their respective goals. Further, we emphasise that there may be other limitations to an actor’s participation in the process. In particular the health care system is required to respect patient autonomy and confidentiality. There is also an inherent tension in the dual roles of health care professionals as therapists and expert witnesses in work ability assessment. In conclusion, there are potential tensions between the key actors in the return-to-work process. These tensions need to be addressed in order to enable an increased cooperation between actors and to facilitate the development of a feasible plan of action for all parties, including the employee.</p>","PeriodicalId":46740,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Analysis","volume":"202 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cooperation in Return-to-work Interventions for Common Mental Disorders: An Ideal Theory Analysis of Actors, Goals, and Ethical Obstacles\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Hartvigsson, Lars Sandman, Gunnar Bergström, Elisabeth Björk Brämberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10728-024-00491-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The rise in the number of people on sick leave for common mental disorders is a growing concern, both from a societal and individual perspective. One common suggestion to improve the return-to-work process is increased cooperation between the relevant parties, including at least the employer, the social insurance agency and health care. This suggestion is often made on the presumption that all parties share the common goal of reintegrating the patient-employee back into the workplace. In this paper we investigate this presumption by mapping out the ethical frameworks of these three key actors in any return-to-work process. We show that although the goals of these actors often, and to a large extent, overlap there are potential differences and tensions between their respective goals. Further, we emphasise that there may be other limitations to an actor’s participation in the process. In particular the health care system is required to respect patient autonomy and confidentiality. There is also an inherent tension in the dual roles of health care professionals as therapists and expert witnesses in work ability assessment. In conclusion, there are potential tensions between the key actors in the return-to-work process. These tensions need to be addressed in order to enable an increased cooperation between actors and to facilitate the development of a feasible plan of action for all parties, including the employee.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Care Analysis\",\"volume\":\"202 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Care Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-024-00491-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-024-00491-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从社会和个人角度来看,因常见精神障碍而请病假的人数不断增加日益引起人们的关注。改善重返工作岗位过程的一个常见建议是加强相关各方(至少包括雇主、社会保险机构和医疗保健机构)之间的合作。提出这一建议的前提通常是,所有各方都有一个共同的目标,即让病人和雇员重返工作岗位。在本文中,我们通过对重返工作岗位过程中这三个关键参与者的伦理框架进行分析,对这一假设进行了研究。我们表明,尽管这些参与者的目标经常而且在很大程度上是重叠的,但他们各自的目标之间存在潜在的差异和紧张关系。此外,我们还强调,参与者在参与过程中可能会受到其他限制。特别是医疗系统必须尊重病人的自主权和保密性。在工作能力评估中,医疗保健专业人员既是治疗师,又是专家证人,他们的双重角色也存在内在的紧张关系。总之,重返工作岗位过程中的主要参与者之间存在潜在的紧张关系。这些矛盾需要加以解决,以便加强参与者之间的合作,促进为包括雇员在内的各方制定可行的行动计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cooperation in Return-to-work Interventions for Common Mental Disorders: An Ideal Theory Analysis of Actors, Goals, and Ethical Obstacles

The rise in the number of people on sick leave for common mental disorders is a growing concern, both from a societal and individual perspective. One common suggestion to improve the return-to-work process is increased cooperation between the relevant parties, including at least the employer, the social insurance agency and health care. This suggestion is often made on the presumption that all parties share the common goal of reintegrating the patient-employee back into the workplace. In this paper we investigate this presumption by mapping out the ethical frameworks of these three key actors in any return-to-work process. We show that although the goals of these actors often, and to a large extent, overlap there are potential differences and tensions between their respective goals. Further, we emphasise that there may be other limitations to an actor’s participation in the process. In particular the health care system is required to respect patient autonomy and confidentiality. There is also an inherent tension in the dual roles of health care professionals as therapists and expert witnesses in work ability assessment. In conclusion, there are potential tensions between the key actors in the return-to-work process. These tensions need to be addressed in order to enable an increased cooperation between actors and to facilitate the development of a feasible plan of action for all parties, including the employee.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊介绍: Health Care Analysis is a journal that promotes dialogue and debate about conceptual and normative issues related to health and health care, including health systems, healthcare provision, health law, public policy and health, professional health practice, health services organization and decision-making, and health-related education at all levels of clinical medicine, public health and global health. Health Care Analysis seeks to support the conversation between philosophy and policy, in particular illustrating the importance of conceptual and normative analysis to health policy, practice and research. As such, papers accepted for publication are likely to analyse philosophical questions related to health, health care or health policy that focus on one or more of the following: aims or ends, theories, frameworks, concepts, principles, values or ideology. All styles of theoretical analysis are welcome providing that they illuminate conceptual or normative issues and encourage debate between those interested in health, philosophy and policy. Papers must be rigorous, but should strive for accessibility – with care being taken to ensure that their arguments and implications are plain to a broad academic and international audience. In addition to purely theoretical papers, papers grounded in empirical research or case-studies are very welcome so long as they explore the conceptual or normative implications of such work. Authors are encouraged, where possible, to have regard to the social contexts of the issues they are discussing, and all authors should ensure that they indicate the ‘real world’ implications of their work. Health Care Analysis publishes contributions from philosophers, lawyers, social scientists, healthcare educators, healthcare professionals and administrators, and other health-related academics and policy analysts.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信