The Impact of Specific Psychotherapist Beliefs Regarding Managed Care on Prospective Psychotherapy Clients

The purpose of this study was to investigate the separate impact of each of thirteen therapist beliefs that, presented collectively, were previously found to have a significantly negative impact on prospective clients' attitudes toward managed care psychotherapy (Pomerantz, 2000). Participants in this study initially completed a brief questionnaire measuring their willingness to enter psychotherapy and their expectations regarding psychotherapy under managed care. Participants subsequently completed the same brief questionnaire again after being instructed to imagine seeing a hypothetical psychologist and being presented with the psychologist's supposed beliefs regarding managed care (which were actually derived from survey data by Murphy et al., 1998). Results suggest that almost every discrete therapist belief had a significantly negative impact on participants' attitudes toward managed care psychotherapy. Several specific therapist beliefs produced particularly salient negative effects. Implications regarding ethics and informed consent are discussed.     

Physicians' Silent Decisions: Because Patient Autonomy Does Not Always Come First

Physicians make some medical decisions without disclosure to their patients. Nondisclosure is possible because these are silent decisions to refrain from screening, diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. Nondisclosure is ethically permissible when the usual presumption that the patient should be involved in decisions is defeated by considerations of clinical utility or patient emotional and physical well-being. Some silent decisions—not all—are ethically justified by this standard. Justified silent decisions are typically dependent on the physician's professional judgment, experience and knowledge, and are not likely to be changed by patient preferences. We condemn the inappropriate exclusion of the patient from the decision-making process. However, if a test or treatment is unlikely to yield a net benefit, disclosure and discussion are at times unnecessary. Appropriate silent decisions are ethically justified by such considerations as patient benefit or economy of time.     

Patient Expectations of Benefit from Phase I Clinical Trials: Linguistic Considerations in Diagnosing a Therapeutic Misconception

The ethical treatment of cancer patientsparticipating in clinical trials requiresthat patients are well-informed about thepotential benefits and risks associated withparticipation. When patients enrolled in phaseI clinical trials report that their chance ofbenefit is very high, this is often taken as evidence of a failure of the informed consent process. We argue, however, that some simple themes from the philosophy of language may make such a conclusion less certain. First, the patient may receive conflicting statements from multiple speakers about the expected outcome of the trial. Patients may be reporting the message they like best. Second, there is a potential problem of multivocality. Expressions of uncertainty of the frequency type(e.g., ``On average, 5 out of every 100 patientswill benefit') can be confused with expressionsof uncertainty of the belief type (e.g.,``The chance that I will benefit is about80%'). Patients may be informed using frequency-type statements and respond using belief-type statements. Third, each speech episode involving the investigator and the patient regarding outcomes may subservemultiple speech acts, some of which may beindirect. For example, a patient reporting ahigh expected benefit may be reporting a beliefabout the future, reassuring family members,and/or attempting to improve his or her outcome by apublic assertion of optimism. These sources oflinguistic confusion should be considered injudging whether the patient's reported expectation isgrounds for a bioethical concern that there hasbeen a failure in the informed consent process.     

When it comes to people,one size doesn’t fit all: A comment on Wayne

Dr. Wayne proposes that an autonomy-based approach to the treatment and care of older patients with dementia be replaced with an agency-based approach. In this commentary, I suggest that such a shift is unnecessary and would undermine patients’ moral, legal, and human rights.     

健康医疗数据相关研究的伦理审查要点重构及其论证

健康医疗数据相关研究极大地拓展了传统生物医学研究的范畴,影响了医学研究的思路、方法和范式,也给伦理审查带来了新的挑战。从梳理国际伦理指南对健康医疗数据相关研究提出的要求出发,探讨此类研究当前的伦理审查现状及挑战,强调伦理审查不仅要关注风险获益比、知情同意程序、隐私保护措施这些核心问题,还需要以更加全面和深入的视角进行关注。同时,针对研究的科学价值和社会价值、研究目的的合理性和合法性、数据治理和数据管理要求、风险获益评估、知情同意模式创新以及研究团队资质等六个伦理审查要点进行重构和探讨。     

Ethical Dimension of Paediatric Cochlear Implantation

In congenitally or prelingually deaf childrencochlear implantation is open to seriousethical challenge. The ethical dimension ofthis technology is closely related to both asocial standard of quality of life and to theuncertainty of the overall results of cochlearimplantation. Uncertainty with regards theacquisition of oral communicative skills.However, in the western world, available datasuggest that deafness is associated with thelowest educational level and the lowest familyincome. Notwithstanding the existence of aDeaf-World, deafness should be considered as ahandicap. Therefore, society should provide themeans for the fulfilment of a deaf child'sspecific needs.For the time being there is no definitiveanswer with regard the best way to rehabilitatea particular deaf child. Therefore,communitarian values may be acceptable. If thedeaf child parents' decide not to implant,their decision should be respected. Guardiansare entitled to determine which standard ofbest interest to use in a specificcircumstance. They are the proper judges ofwhat (re)habilitation process is best for theirdeaf child. However, most deaf children areborn to two hearing parents. Probably, theywill not be acculturated in the Deaf-World. Itfollows that cochlear implantation is awelcomed (re)habilitation technology.If auditory (re)habilitation will in the futureprovide the necessary communicative skills, inparticular oral language acquisition, customs,values and attitudes of the hearing worldshould be regarded as necessary to accomplish adeaf child's right to an open future. Ifcochlear implantation technology will provideall deaf children with the capacity to developacceptable oral communicative skills –whatever the hearing status of the family andthe cultural environment – then auditory(re)habilitation will be an ethical imperative.     

探讨和完善生物医学期刊来稿中的伦理学问题

生物医学期刊来稿中最常见的伦理学问题就是受试者“知情同意”的问题。生物医学期刊通过提高编辑人员素质、加强医学伦理学宣传教育、对来稿严格把关以及协助科研机构建立和完善伦理学审查委员会,不断探讨和完善来稿中的伦理学问题,这不仅是对受试者负责,而且有利于医学科研人员素质的提高,有利于生物医学研究健康、有序的发展。     

基因研究中的知情同意之惑

知情同意作为生命伦理的重要原则,在基因研究中同样占据重要的地位,由于基因研究中知情同意的异质性,在基因研究中面临着诸如如何理解其知情同意的异质性、群体知情同意、基因知情与基因隐私、利益冲突等问题.通过分析基因研究中知情同意的特殊性,综合国内外此领域的已有研究,运用理论联系实际的方法,得出结论认为,只有正确区分基因知情与基因隐私的权利主体,用伦理规范来解决利益冲突,在发展中不断完善知情同意,才能够取得科技与伦理的共赢.     

谈医疗行为中患者知情同意权的实现

目前,关于患者的知情同意权的讨论引起了众多医院管理者的关注。对知情同意与医疗行为的矛盾冲突进行探讨,提出医疗行为为中实现患者知情同意的对策及伦理原则。     

注重全人群、全方位、全过程——论受试者知情同意伦理审查的强化

通过对医药学研究人体试验受试者知情同意的伦理审查发展现状的说明,分析现阶段知情同意伦理审查工作中存在流于形式,审查结果不够科学、客观和公正等问题。再结合医药学研究的发展需要,说明知情同意伦理审查的工作情况和不断发展的要求。提出对知情同意做到全人群、全方位、全过程的伦理审查的覆盖。并通过实施全人群、全方位、全过程的伦理审查的过程,提高人体试验受试者知情同意伦理审查水平,促进医药学研究和社会医学的发展。     

病人、医生与知情同意

医务人员应当视病人为治疗疾病过程中的参与者.知情同意的目的是,使病人充分理解他的困境后做出理性的决定.医生与病人分享信息、分担责任与做出决定,以保持良好的医患关系.