儿童作为器官捐献者:一个伦理分析模型。

Q3 Medicine
Edmund G Howe
{"title":"儿童作为器官捐献者:一个伦理分析模型。","authors":"Edmund G Howe","doi":"10.1086/733188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>AbstractIn this introduction I discuss several ethical issues pertaining to the question other authors raise regarding whether we should permit minors to donate an organ-such as part of their liver or a kidney-to a sibling. I discuss particularly limits of what ethical analysis can accomplish; overriding, disproportionate effects of what might appear to be no more than minor nuances; exceptional expertise \"ethics experts\" can and can't offer; how patients' and family members' feelings may prevail over rational arguments; the importance of recognizing and respecting patients' felt relationships with others; and our global obligations to people worse off. A core feeling considered is a child's feeling of guilt if the child doesn't donate and this sibling dies. A nuance considered is a sibling wanting to donate to an identical twin. I consider some providers' bias that an intervention is death prolonging rather than life prolonging. When providers arrive at an impasse and continue to reasonably differ, switching the question to how an ethical resolution should be reached and by whom is recommended. Practical applications such as this that can be implemented by providers now are offered in regard to each of the ethical issues addressed.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":"36 1","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Children as Organ Donors: A Model of Ethical Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Edmund G Howe\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/733188\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>AbstractIn this introduction I discuss several ethical issues pertaining to the question other authors raise regarding whether we should permit minors to donate an organ-such as part of their liver or a kidney-to a sibling. I discuss particularly limits of what ethical analysis can accomplish; overriding, disproportionate effects of what might appear to be no more than minor nuances; exceptional expertise \\\"ethics experts\\\" can and can't offer; how patients' and family members' feelings may prevail over rational arguments; the importance of recognizing and respecting patients' felt relationships with others; and our global obligations to people worse off. A core feeling considered is a child's feeling of guilt if the child doesn't donate and this sibling dies. A nuance considered is a sibling wanting to donate to an identical twin. I consider some providers' bias that an intervention is death prolonging rather than life prolonging. When providers arrive at an impasse and continue to reasonably differ, switching the question to how an ethical resolution should be reached and by whom is recommended. Practical applications such as this that can be implemented by providers now are offered in regard to each of the ethical issues addressed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Ethics\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/733188\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/733188","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇引言中,我讨论了几个与其他作者提出的问题有关的伦理问题,即我们是否应该允许未成年人捐赠器官——比如他们的部分肝脏或肾脏——给兄弟姐妹。我特别讨论了伦理分析所能完成的局限;看似微不足道的细微差别所产生的压倒一切的、不成比例的影响;“道德专家”能提供或不能提供的特殊专业知识;患者和家属的感受如何胜过理性的争论;承认和尊重患者与他人的感觉关系的重要性;我们对人们的全球义务也变得更糟。考虑的核心感受是,如果孩子没有捐赠,而这个兄弟姐妹死了,孩子的内疚感。考虑的一个细微差别是兄弟姐妹想要捐赠给同卵双胞胎。我考虑到一些提供者的偏见,认为干预是延长死亡而不是延长生命。当提供者到达一个僵局,并继续合理的分歧,把问题转换到一个道德的解决方案应该如何达成,由谁推荐。诸如此类的实际应用程序现在可以由提供者实施,针对所解决的每个道德问题提供。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Children as Organ Donors: A Model of Ethical Analysis.

AbstractIn this introduction I discuss several ethical issues pertaining to the question other authors raise regarding whether we should permit minors to donate an organ-such as part of their liver or a kidney-to a sibling. I discuss particularly limits of what ethical analysis can accomplish; overriding, disproportionate effects of what might appear to be no more than minor nuances; exceptional expertise "ethics experts" can and can't offer; how patients' and family members' feelings may prevail over rational arguments; the importance of recognizing and respecting patients' felt relationships with others; and our global obligations to people worse off. A core feeling considered is a child's feeling of guilt if the child doesn't donate and this sibling dies. A nuance considered is a sibling wanting to donate to an identical twin. I consider some providers' bias that an intervention is death prolonging rather than life prolonging. When providers arrive at an impasse and continue to reasonably differ, switching the question to how an ethical resolution should be reached and by whom is recommended. Practical applications such as this that can be implemented by providers now are offered in regard to each of the ethical issues addressed.

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
Journal of Clinical Ethics
Journal of Clinical Ethics Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Ethics is written for and by physicians, nurses, attorneys, clergy, ethicists, and others whose decisions directly affect patients. More than 70 percent of the articles are authored or co-authored by physicians. JCE is a double-blinded, peer-reviewed journal indexed in PubMed, Current Contents/Social & Behavioral Sciences, the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature, and other indexes.
×
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