公共卫生监测中的伦理原则及标准

从理论上概述了各时期监测定义的演变以及相关伦理辩论,列举了公共卫生监测所引发的普遍的伦理问题及适用的主要伦理原则,揭示了临床医学和公共卫生中伦理问题的不同。人权是个人利益和集体利益的共同基础,因此,也可能是临床伦理和公共卫生伦理的共同基础。最后,依据《世界卫生组织关于公共卫生监测中伦理问题的指南》及其他文献列出多种公共卫生伦理标准,试图在实际工作中帮助评估公共卫生监测方案在伦理上的可接受性。     

70岁高龄男性助孕引发的问题及伦理思考

报道了1例70岁高龄男性的助孕情况,探讨了高龄男性生育现状、高龄男性助孕存在的问题以及助孕易于引发的伦理问题。意在提醒生殖中心工作人员在接诊高龄男性患者助孕时,既要尊重其与配偶的生育权,又要充分告知高龄男性生育给自身、配偶及后代带来的风险。助孕前应加强医患沟通,遵循有利于患者原则、知情同意原则、有利于后代原则,同时接受伦理委员会的监督,严防技术滥用,适时劝导高龄男性患者放弃助孕治疗。     

疫病态势下国家健康权力行使的伦理规制

国家健康权力是由国家行使的专为对社会民众或其他主体的健康权利进行权衡、协调和确认之力。它包括健康定义权、健康立法权、健康资源配置调节权等权能。国家通过权力认可健康概念、制定健康法律法规、协调健康人力和物力资源。在疫病态势下,国家健康权力在疫病防控、人员物资调配、疾病检测、疾病治疗等方面起着关键作用。在健康权力行使过程中,既受医学伦理原则的制约,又赋予"生命神圣"、自主、行善、不伤害、公正原则以新的涵义。     

骨折治疗方法与原则的最优化历程

多年来骨折治疗,新旧技术、新旧理论相互融合,相互碰撞,产生了新的理论和方法,使得临床疗效显著提高,现阶段理智的临床医生应该融汇各家之长,多方互补,对每一位骨折患者的治疗都应该按照最优化的原则进行。但是在医疗过程中总存在着如方法选择不当或者错误,过度治疗,医患信任危机,医疗伦理道德的丧失等情况,我们应该用矛盾分析的方法来思考这些问题。     

罕见病患者权利保障的伦理责任

罕见病患者的道德、法律、经济与文化权利都无法得到应有保障。这与传统道德以亲疏远近来决定责任的承担顺序有关。在这种道德模式下,各个责任主体对罕见病患者的有效支持不足。罗伯特·E·古丁的弱势原理提供了一个全新审视伦理责任的维度,指出责任源于弱势,责任效力与责任对象依赖责任主体的程度密切相关。从不同维度看,罕见病患者都属于弱势群体,因而可运用此原理,将其权利保障的责任分配于不同责任主体,并以责任效力的高低顺序,重构以政府、医护方、企业、社会组织、媒体与大众、家庭对罕见病患者的伦理责任体系。

     

Are All Kids Alike? The Magnitude of Individual Differences in Personality Characteristics Tends to Increase from Early Childhood to Early Adolescence

Do individual differences in personality traits become more or less pronounced over childhood and adolescence? The present research examined age differences in the variance of a range of personality traits, using parent reports of two large samples of children from predominantly the USA and Russia, respectively. Results indicate (i) that individual differences in most traits tend to increase with age from early childhood into early adolescence and then plateau, (ii) that this general pattern of greater personality variance at older childhood age is consistent across the two countries, and (iii) that this pattern is not an artefact of age differences in means or floor/ceiling effects. These findings are consistent with several (noncontradictory) developmental mechanisms, including youths' expanding behavioural capacities and person–environment transactions (corresponsive principle). However, these mechanisms may predominantly characterize periods before adolescence, or they may be offset by countervailing processes, such as socialization pressure towards a mature personality profile, in late adolescence and adulthood. Finally, the findings also suggest that interpreting age trajectories in mean trait scores as pertaining to age differences in a typical person may sometimes be misleading. Investigating variance should become an integral part of studying personality development. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology     

当代心理学发展的一种新取向--进化心理学

进化心理学是近年在西方心理学中出现的一种新的研究取向,目前仍没有一个明确的概念和系统的理论。其基本主张是：过去是理解心理机制的关键;功能分析是理解心理机制的主要途径;心理机制是在解决问题的过程中演化形成的;模块性是心理机制整体组织的特性;人的行为是心理机制和环境互动作用的结果。进化心理学的发展既有意义同时也存在局限。其意义是：其发展与当代科学发展趋势相一致;它的研究促进了对人性和心理的进一步思考。局限是：具有遗传决定论的倾向;方法论存在一定的缺陷,忽视了文化对进化的意义等等。     

What is the Accordion Effect?

In "Action and Responsibility,' Joel Feinberg pointed to an important idea to which he gave the label "the accordion effect.' Feinberg's discussion of this idea is of interest on its own, but it is also of interest because of its interaction with his critique, in his "Causing Voluntary Actions,' of a much discussed view of H. L. A. Hart and A. M. Honoré that Feinberg labels the "voluntary intervention principle.' In this essay I reflect on what the accordion effect is supposed by Feinberg to be, on differences between Feinberg's understanding of this idea and that of Donald Davidson, and on the interaction between Feinberg's discussion of the accordion effect and his critique of the voluntary intervention principle.     

Two Theories of Just War

As it is traditionally conceived, Just War Theory is not well suited for dealing with nation vs non-nation wars. It thus makes sense to create a second Just War Theory to deal with these wars. This article explores the differences and similarities between the two theories.

DELAYED REINFORCEMENT OF OPERANT BEHAVIOR

The experimental analysis of delay of reinforcement is considered from the perspective of three questions that seem basic not only to understanding delay of reinforcement, but, also, by implication, the contributions of temporal relations between events to operant behavior. The first question is whether effects of the temporal relation between responses and reinforcers can be isolated from other features of the environment that often accompany delays, such as stimuli or changes in the temporal distribution or rate of reinforcement. The second question is that of the effects of delays on operant behavior. Beyond the common denominator of a temporal separation between reinforcers and the responses that produce them, delay of reinforcement procedures differ from one another along several dimensions, making delay effects circumstance dependent. The final question is one of interpreting delay of reinforcement effects. It centers on the role of the response—reinforcer temporal relation in the context of other, concurrently operating behavioral processes.