面对临床无效治疗:思考与抉择

对于没有临床救治意义的病人 ,要不要继续治疗 ?这既是临床医疗问题 ,又是一个涉及社会、伦理、法规的问题。在社会多元化发展的今天 ,对于临床无效治疗无论放弃与否 ,都应当把维护病人的利益作为医疗活动的出发点。在此基础上 ,知情同意和尊重病人自主权是医务人员必须遵循的基本道德原则 ,同时也应当考虑卫生资源的有效分配和社会公众的健康利益     

Ethical considerations in neuroimaging and its impact on decision-making for neonates

Neuroimaging can now provide information about structure and function. Despite new and improved neuroimaging technologies applicable to the newborn, predictions about later cognition, learning, social and emotional behavior, and neuromuscular capabilities, based on images of a fetus inside or a newborn outside the womb, are fraught with difficulties that go beyond technical ones. The interpretation of neuroimages may be necessary but it is not sufficient for decision-making related to the withholding or withdrawing of medical support for neonates. As the explanatory reach of neuroimaging increases, there will still need to be consideration of ethical issues as they relate to the best interests of the neonate and the neonate's parents, the quality of life of the neonate and non-beneficial treatment. Once this is appreciated, the boundary between the technical and the ethical will be less often disputed.     

Respect for the developmentally disabled and forgoing life-sustaining treatment

A developmentally disabled person should be treated at all times as a unique individual and not as some anonymous "disabled person." The developmentally disabled should not be subjected to invasive medical treatment that is unduly burdensome or nonbeneficial, or be forced to endure a quality of life not meaningful to them as individuals. They have a right to refuse or accept treatment that a surrogate must exercise on behalf of each individual in a responsible and careful manner. Three cases and a preliminary approach to the ethical analysis of decisions to allow developmentally disabled persons to die by forgoing medical treatment are offered. The "best interests" of a developmentally disabled individual, properly understood, can serve as a useful and ethically defensible standard for determining the ethical propriety of surrogate decision making about forgoing life-sustaining medical treatment of the disabled.     

Forgoing life-sustaining treatment: limits to the consensus. Part 2

While substantial progress has been made in reaching a moral and policy consensus regarding forgoing life-sustaining treatment, several holes exist in that consensus where more public discussion and moral analysis is needed. First, among patients who have not been found to be legally incompetent there is controversy over whether certain treatments can be refused. Controversies also remain over damages for treatment without consent, limits based on third-party interests and the ethical integrity of the medical profession, and cases where it cannot be agreed whether the patient is competent. Even greater dispute exists over care of incompetent patients. Perhaps the greatest gap in the consensus arises over limits to the use of the best interests standard. This article proposes replacing it with a "reasonableness standard" that takes into account disputes about what is literally the best for the patient and conflicts of interest between the patient and others.     

Treating fetuses: The patient as person

The medical treatment in utero of human beings raises several ethical questions. I argue that treatment is sufficient to establish the fetus as person; and consider how conflicts between the interests of the fetus and mother are to be resolved when such treatment is proposed. My arguments rest upon a 'relational model' of ethical discourse derived from H. Richard Niebuhr's "ethics of the fitting." I conclude that the limitation of personal autonomy is rarely justified, but may be when direct, grave, harm to others is imminent; and that educative rather than punitive measures are the best prospect for protecting fetal life.     

Parental refusals of medical treatment: the harm principle as threshold for state intervention

Minors are generally considered incompetent to provide legally binding decisions regarding their health care, and parents or guardians are empowered to make those decisions on their behalf. Parental authority is not absolute, however, and when a parent acts contrary to the best interests of a child, the state may intervene. The best interests standard is the threshold most frequently employed in challenging a parent's refusal to provide consent for a child's medical care. In this paper, I will argue that the best interest standard provides insufficient guidance for decision-making regarding children and does not reflect the actual standard used by medical providers and courts. Rather, I will suggest that the Harm Principle provides a more appropriate threshold for state intervention than the Best Interest standard. Finally, I will suggest a series of criteria that can be used in deciding whether the state should intervene in a parent's decision to refuse medical care on behalf of a child.     

Contributions of empirical research to medical ethics

Empirical research pertaining to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), clinician behaviors related to do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders and substituted judgment suggests potential contributions to medical ethics. Research quantifying the likelihood of surviving CPR points to the need for further philosophical analysis of the limitations of the patient autonomy in decision making, the nature and definition of medical futility, and the relationship between futility and professional standards. Research on DNR orders has identified barriers to the goal of patient involvement in these life and death discussions. The initial data on surrogate decision making also points to the need for a reexamination of the moral basis for substituted judgment, the moral authority of proxy decision making and the second-order status of the best interests standard. These examples of empirical research suggest that an interplay between empirical research, ethical analysis and policy development may represent a new form of interdisciplinary scholarship to improve clinical medicine.     

Conscientious objection and emergency contraception

This article argues that practitioners have a professional ethical obligation to dispense emergency contraception, even given conscientious objection to this treatment. This recent controversy affects all medical professionals, including physicians as well as pharmacists. This article begins by analyzing the option of referring the patient to another willing provider. Objecting professionals may conscientiously refuse because they consider emergency contraception to be equivalent to abortion or because they believe contraception itself is immoral. This article critically evaluates these reasons and concludes that they do not successfully support conscientious objection in this context. Contrary to the views of other thinkers, it is not possible to easily strike a respectful balance between the interests of objecting providers and patients in this case. As medical professionals, providers have an ethical duty to inform women of this option and provide emergency contraception when this treatment is requested.     

Balancing Elder Care Responsibilities and Work: The Impact on Emotional Health

The current study investigated the effects of balancing elder care and work on emotional health. Responses from 43 retired caregivers, 211 not retired caregivers, 49 retired non-caregivers, and 224 not retired non-caregivers, who had participated in the national Health and Retirement Study, served as the data base. Results indicate that Caregiver Status (Caregiver vs. Non-caregiver) and Retirement Status (Retired vs. Not Retired) interact, depending on the measure of emotional health. The relationship between the number of depression symptoms reported and Caregiver Status depended on whether the respondent was also retired or employed; a significant interaction was not found when emotional health was measured with one overall item. A significant difference was not found between employed caregivers and employed non-caregivers, in terms of emotional health. Employed caregivers who gave more caregiving hours did report poorer emotional health than employed caregivers who gave fewer hours. Female caregivers reported more depression symptoms than male caregivers. The results suggest that employers may need to develop interventions which may help caregivers who are highly involved with caregiving responsibilities.     

医患关系的本质:医生的专业视角及其伦理意蕴

力图从为西方医学领域已完善发展及广为接受的专业(Professional)视角对医患关系(Patient-professional Relationship,以下及正文中皆简称为PPR)的伦理意蕴做探讨.简要追溯了现代医护专业精神的起源,说明了道德责任之所以是专业这一概念的重要组成部分的原因,并且指出为病人最大利益着想是医护专业最根本的道德规范与责任,亦是医患关系不可缺少的伦理基石.     

Pacemaker deactivation: withdrawal of support or active ending of life?

In spite of ethical analyses assimilating the palliative deactivation of pacemakers to commonly accepted withdrawings of life-sustaining therapy, many clinicians remain ethically uncomfortable with pacemaker deactivation at the end of life. Various reasons have been posited for this discomfort. Some cardiologists have suggested that reluctance to deactivate pacemakers may stem from a sense that the pacemaker has become part of the patient??s ??self.?? The authors suggest that Daniel Sulmasy is correct to contend that any such identification of the pacemaker is misguided. The authors argue that clinicians uncomfortable with pacemaker deactivation are nevertheless correct to see it as incompatible with the traditional medical ethics of withdrawal of support. Traditional medical ethics is presently taken by many to sanction pacemaker deactivation when such deactivation honors the patient??s right to refuse treatment. The authors suggest that the right to refuse treatment applies to treatments involving ongoing physician agency. This right cannot underwrite patient demands that physicians reverse the effects of treatments previously administered, in which ongoing physician agency is no longer implicated. The permanently indwelling pacemaker is best seen as such a treatment. As such, its deactivation in the pacemaker-dependent patient is best seen not as withdrawal of support but as active ending of life. That being the case, clinicians adhering to the usual ethical analysis of withdrawal of support are correct to be uncomfortable with pacemaker deactivation at the end of life.     

Balancing Confidentiality and Collaboration Within Multidisciplinary Health Care Teams

As multidisciplinary perspectives are increasingly integrated into the treatment of health problems, opportunities for clinical psychologists in medical settings are expanding. Although cross-discipline collaboration is at the core of multidisciplinary treatment models, psychologists must be particularly cautious about information sharing due to their profession??s ethical standards regarding patient confidentiality. Psychologists?? ethical obligations require them to achieve a delicate balance between contributing to the treatment team and protecting patient confidentiality. In the current review, relevant ethical standards and federal guidelines are applied to everyday practices of clinical psychologists in medical settings. Additionally, recommendations for individual psychologists, health care organizations, and graduate training programs are presented.     

What is morally at stake when using algorithms to make medical diagnoses? Expanding the discussion beyond risks and harms

In this paper, we examine the qualitative moral impact of machine learning-based clinical decision support systems in the process of medical diagnosis. To date, discussions about machine learning in this context have focused on problems that can be measured and assessed quantitatively, such as by estimating the extent of potential harm or calculating incurred risks. We maintain that such discussions neglect the qualitative moral impact of these technologies. Drawing on the philosophical approaches of technomoral change and technological mediation theory, which explore the interplay between technologies and morality, we present an analysis of concerns related to the adoption of machine learning-aided medical diagnosis. We analyze anticipated moral issues that machine learning systems pose for different stakeholders, such as bias and opacity in the way that models are trained to produce diagnoses, changes to how health care providers, patients, and developers understand their roles and professions, and challenges to existing forms of medical legislation. Albeit preliminary in nature, the insights offered by the technomoral change and the technological mediation approaches expand and enrich the current discussion about machine learning in diagnostic practices, bringing distinct and currently underexplored areas of concern to the forefront. These insights can contribute to a more encompassing and better informed decision-making process when adapting machine learning techniques to medical diagnosis, while acknowledging the interests of multiple stakeholders and the active role that technologies play in generating, perpetuating, and modifying ethical concerns in health care.

     

Death by non-feeding: Not in the baby's best interests

It has recently been suggested that doctors have a duty to act in their patient's best interest and that this duty demands that life-sustaining treatment—including food and fluids—should sometimes be withheld or withdrawn and the patient allowed to die. In this article, the author explores the scope of the ‘best interests principle’ in the context of treatment decisions for seriously handicapped newborn infants. She argues that those who hold that it is permissible to starve or dehydrate an infant to death are mistaken to think that this course of action is in the infant's best interests. While it may be true that there are times whendeath is, everything considered, in an infant's best interests, a slow and distressingmethod of bringing death about is not. Since death by dehydration and starvation is not benign, the withholding of food and fluids is generally not in an infant's best interests. The author concludes by suggesting thatwhenever the withdrawal or non-employment of life-sustaining means imposes a heavy burden on the infant, the ‘best interests principle’ would demand that the infant be killed rather than allowed to die.     

Personal Identity, Autonomy and Advance Statements

abstract    Recent legal rulings concerning the status of advance statements have raised interest in the topic but failed to provide any definitive general guidelines for their enforcement. I examine arguments used to justify the moral authority of such statements. The fundamental ethical issue I am concerned with is how accounts of personal identity underpin our account of moral authority through the connection between personal identity and autonomy. I focus on how recent Animalist accounts of personal identity initially appear to provide a sound basis for extending the moral autonomy of an individual — and hence their autonomous wishes expressed through an advance statement — past the point of severe psychological decline. I argue that neither the traditional psychological account nor the more recent Animalist account of personal identity manage to provide a sufficient basis for extending our moral autonomy past the point of incapacity or incompetence. I briefly explore how analogies to similar areas in law designed to facilitate autonomous decision, such as wills and trusts, provide at best only very limited scope for an alternative justification for granting advance statements any legal or moral authority. I conclude that whilst advance statements play a useful role in formulating what treatment is in a patient's best interests, such statements do not ultimately have sufficient moral force to take precedence over paternalistic best interests judgements concerning an individual's care or treatment.     

The ethics of enforced medical treatment: the balance model

ABSTRACT When is it right to enforce medical treatment on a patient who is refusing that treatment? English law recognises two ethical principles as of paramount importance: the autonomy of the patient; and the consequences of not treating compared with treating. The law, by and large, operates these principles in succession. Thus, in the case of a patient refusing treatment, the law asks first, is the patient competent? Only if the answer is no, are the consequences considered. We criticise the position taken by English law and argue, first, that competence is a graded and not a binary concept, and secondly, that the two ethical principles should be applied not sequentially but at the same time. These two ideas form what we have called the balance model. This model could be used for an empirical study of individuals’ ethical beliefs, and in particular to test the hypothesis that the ethical beliefs of most individuals conform to the balance model rather than to the position taken by English law.     

子宫肌瘤手术治疗中的伦理学要求

子宫肌瘤手术治疗工作的伦理学要求不同于一般的外科手术。本文通过子宫肌瘤手术前、中、后三个时期不同伦理要求进行分析,指出只要妇科手术医生以医务人员的职业医德规范严格要求自己,在不断学习专业技术的同时,加强自身对医学伦理学的学习,给予病人充分的理解、尊重和心理支持,一定会使每位子宫肌瘤病人的手术治疗过程符合医学伦理学要求。     

Trotter G: The Ethics of Coercion in Mass Casualty Medicine The Johns Hopkins University Press; 2007

Public health ethics is neither taught widely in medical schools or schools of public health in the US or around the world. It is not surprising that health care professionals are particularly challenged when faced with ethical questions which extend beyond safeguarding the interests of their individual patients to matters that affect overall public good. The perceived threat of terror after September 11 2007, the anthrax attacks and the Katrina debacle are recent circumstances which may result in coercion. These have piqued the interest of medical professionals and the general public on public health ethics. The Ethics of Coercion in Mass Casualty Medicine written by Griffin Trotter MD, PhD attempts to fill a timely void in this area by examining the ethics of coercion in times of public health disasters.     

Can the difference in medical fees for self and donor freeze-thaw embryo transfer cycle, be in fact a cover-up for the sale of donated human embryos?

Public health ethics is neither taught widely in medical schools or schools of public health in the US or around the world. It is not surprising that health care professionals are particularly challenged when faced with ethical questions which extend beyond safeguarding the interests of their individual patients to matters that affect overall public good. The perceived threat of terror after September 11 2007, the anthrax attacks and the Katrina debacle are recent circumstances which may result in coercion. These have piqued the interest of medical professionals and the general public on public health ethics. The Ethics of Coercion in Mass Casualty Medicine written by Griffin Trotter MD, PhD attempts to fill a timely void in this area by examining the ethics of coercion in times of public health disasters.     

医疗纠纷处理中若干伦理问题的思考

医疗纠纷的增势和处理难已成为众所周知的事实。但是,在医疗纠纷处理中存在着医患关系的信任性、医疗事故鉴定的公正性和经济裣的合理笥是思考的伦理问题。只要医患双方、乃至社会对诸如医疗行为是否等同于一般的服务行为、病人权益是否等同于消费者权益、医疗事故鉴定是不是医医相护、经济裣能不能实行等价赔偿原则、医疗差错要不要给予经济补偿等有效为统一的认识,就会有利于医疗纠纷的处理,有利于维护医患双方的合法权益,有利