Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mixed Feelings: Physicians' Concerns About Clinical Ethics Committees in Germany

  • Published:
HEC Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

REFERENCES

  1. Slowther A, Bunch C, Woolnough B, and Hope T, Ethox. Clinical ethics support in the UK: A review of the current position and likely development. London: The Nuffield Trust; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Vollmann J. Healthcare ethics committees in Germany: The path ahead. HEC Forum, 2001; 13:255-264.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Deutscher E. Krankenhausverband, Katholischer Krankenhausverband Deutschlands; eds. Ethik-Komitee im Krankenhaus. Stuttgart, Freiburg: Selbstverlag; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Simon A. Ethics committees in Germany: An empirical survey of Christian hospitals. HEC Forum, 2001; 13:225-231.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Reiter-Theil S. Ethics consultation in Germany: The present situation. HEC Forum, 2001; 13:265-280.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gillon R. Clinical ethics committees – Pros and cons. Journal of Medical Ethics, 1997; 23:203-204.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Heilicser BJ, Meltzer D, Siegler M. The effect of clinical medical ethics consultation on healthcare costs. Journal of Clinical Ethics, 2000; 11: 31-38.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Meaney M. From a culture of blame to a culture of safety – The role of institutional ethics committees. Bioethics Forum, 2001; 17: 32-42.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Szeremata M, Dawson J, Manning D, et al. Snapshots of five clinical ethics committees in the UK. Journal of Medical Ethics, 2001; 27 Suppl I:i9-i17.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Troschke, J von. Die Kunst, ein guter Arzt zu werden. Bern, Switzerland: Hans Huber; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Deutscher Ärztetag. (Muster)-Berufsordnung für die deutschen Ärztinnen und Ärzte MBO-Ä 1997. Geändert durch die Beschlüsse des 105. Deutschen Ärztetages 2002 in Rostock. http://www.bundesaerztekammer.de.

  12. Fuchs C. Braucht der Arzt ein neues Selbstverständnis? In: von Engelhardt D, von Loewenich V, Simon A; eds. Die Heilberufe auf der Suche nach ihrer Identität. Münster, Germany: LIT-Verlag; 2001: 107-116.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Huerkamp C. Der Aufstieg der Ärzte im 19. Jahrhundert. Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoek&Ruprecht; Kritische Studien zur Geschichtswissenschaft 68; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Beyleveld D, Brownsword R, Wallace S. Clinical ethics committees: Clinical support or crisis management? HEC Forum, 2002; 14:13-25.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Patzig HK, Schöne-Seifert B. Theoretische Grundlagen und Systematik der Ethik in der Medizin. In: Kahlke W, Reiter-Theil S; eds. Ethik in der Medizin. Stuttgart, Germany: F. Enke, 1995: 1-9.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wolff HP: Arzt und Patient. In: Sass HM; ed. Medizin und Ethik. Stuttgart, Germany: Reclam, 1989: 184-211.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wieland W. Strukturtypen ärztlichen Handelns. In: Sass HM; ed. Medizin und Ethik. Stuttgart, Germany: Reclam, 1989: 69-95.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hoc S. Medizinkommunikation. Zwischen Informationsanspruch und gesetzlichen Risiken. Dtsch Ärztebl, 2002; 99:C1428-1430.

    Google Scholar 

  19. McNeill PM. A critical analysis of Australian clinical ethics committees and the function they serve. Bioethics, 2001; 15:443-460.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rudd PT. The clinical ethics committee at the Royal United Hospital – Bath, England. HEC Forum, 2002; 14:37-44.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Steinkamp N, Gordijn B. The two-layer model of clinical ethics and training program for the Malteser Hospital Association. HEC Forum, 2001; 13:242-254.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gerdes B, Richter G. Ethik-Konsultationsdienst nach dem Konzept von J.C. Fletcher an der University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA. Ethik Med., 1999; 10:249-261

    Google Scholar 

  23. American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. Core competencies for health care ethics consultation, Glenview, IL: ASBH; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vollmann J. Der klinische Ethiker – ein Konzept mit Zukunft? Ethik Med., 1995; 7:181-192.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Doyal L. Clinical ethics committees and the formulation of health care policy. Journal of Medical Ethics, 2001; 27 suppl I: i44-i49.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fletcher JC, Siegler M. What are the goals of ethics consultation? A consensus statement. Journal of Clinical Ethics, 1996; 7:122-126.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Siegler M.: Ethics committees: Decisions by bureaucracy. Hastings Center Report, 1986; 16:22-24.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Slowther A, Hill D, McMillan J. Clinical ethics committees: opportunity or threat? HEC Forum, 2002; 14:4-12.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Orr RD, Morton KR, deLeon DM, Fals JC. Evaluation of an ethics consultation service: Patient and family perspective. American Journal of Medicine, 1996; 101:135-141.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Dzur AW. Democratizing the hospital: Deliberative-democratic bioethics. J Health Polit Policy Law, 2002; 27:177-211.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Andrea Dörries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dörries, A. Mixed Feelings: Physicians' Concerns About Clinical Ethics Committees in Germany. HEC Forum 15, 245–257 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:HECF.0000014773.58769.46

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:HECF.0000014773.58769.46

Keywords

Search

Navigation