交际行动和实际话语赋予患者在医疗保健相关决策

Karolina Napiwodzka
{"title":"交际行动和实际话语赋予患者在医疗保健相关决策","authors":"Karolina Napiwodzka","doi":"10.18778/0208-6107.38.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the paper is to reconsider Habermas’ discourse approach in terms of its usefulness in the realm of public healthcare where, on a microscale, intersubjective communicative situations arise between defined participants, i.e., patients and healthcare providers, patients’ family members, and further eligible contributors to patient-related decision making. A need for more “communicative interaction,” and explicative and practical discourse, is illustrated by two empirical examples of medical decision making which reveal both communicative and discursive deficits (Section I). To empower and enable the patient as a rational and autonomous speaker and discourse participant, a Habermasian emancipatory argument and ‘the power of the better argument’ is recalled (Section III). The possibility of equal communicative and discursive rights in the light of real inequalities is discussed in the context of a ‘competence gap’ between participants (Section IV). Further sections focus on the importance of informed consent on the side of the patient and the communicative competences as an important factor of healthcare system.","PeriodicalId":34263,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Lodziensis Folia Philosophica","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communicative action and practical discourse to empower patients in healthcare-related decision making\",\"authors\":\"Karolina Napiwodzka\",\"doi\":\"10.18778/0208-6107.38.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of the paper is to reconsider Habermas’ discourse approach in terms of its usefulness in the realm of public healthcare where, on a microscale, intersubjective communicative situations arise between defined participants, i.e., patients and healthcare providers, patients’ family members, and further eligible contributors to patient-related decision making. A need for more “communicative interaction,” and explicative and practical discourse, is illustrated by two empirical examples of medical decision making which reveal both communicative and discursive deficits (Section I). To empower and enable the patient as a rational and autonomous speaker and discourse participant, a Habermasian emancipatory argument and ‘the power of the better argument’ is recalled (Section III). The possibility of equal communicative and discursive rights in the light of real inequalities is discussed in the context of a ‘competence gap’ between participants (Section IV). Further sections focus on the importance of informed consent on the side of the patient and the communicative competences as an important factor of healthcare system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Universitatis Lodziensis Folia Philosophica\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Universitatis Lodziensis Folia Philosophica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6107.38.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Universitatis Lodziensis Folia Philosophica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6107.38.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文的目的是重新考虑哈贝马斯的话语方法在公共医疗保健领域的有用性,在微观尺度上,定义参与者之间的主体间交际情况出现,即患者和医疗保健提供者,患者的家庭成员,以及进一步符合条件的患者相关决策的贡献者。需要更多的“交流互动”,以及解释性和实践性话语,通过两个医疗决策的经验例子来说明,这些例子揭示了沟通和话语的缺陷(第1节)。为了使患者成为理性和自主的演讲者和话语参与者,回顾哈贝马斯的解放论点和“更好的论点的力量”(第三节)。在参与者之间的“能力差距”的背景下,讨论了在现实不平等的情况下平等交流和话语权利的可能性(第四节)。进一步的章节关注患者方面知情同意的重要性,以及沟通能力作为医疗保健系统的一个重要因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Communicative action and practical discourse to empower patients in healthcare-related decision making
The aim of the paper is to reconsider Habermas’ discourse approach in terms of its usefulness in the realm of public healthcare where, on a microscale, intersubjective communicative situations arise between defined participants, i.e., patients and healthcare providers, patients’ family members, and further eligible contributors to patient-related decision making. A need for more “communicative interaction,” and explicative and practical discourse, is illustrated by two empirical examples of medical decision making which reveal both communicative and discursive deficits (Section I). To empower and enable the patient as a rational and autonomous speaker and discourse participant, a Habermasian emancipatory argument and ‘the power of the better argument’ is recalled (Section III). The possibility of equal communicative and discursive rights in the light of real inequalities is discussed in the context of a ‘competence gap’ between participants (Section IV). Further sections focus on the importance of informed consent on the side of the patient and the communicative competences as an important factor of healthcare system.
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
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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