Abstract
Curbside ethics consultations occur when an ethics consultant provides guidance to a party who seeks assistance over ethical concerns in a case, without the consultant involving other stakeholders, conducting his or her own comprehensive review of the case, or writing a chart note. Some have argued that curbside consultation is problematic because the consultant, in focusing on a single narrative offered by the party seeking advice, necessarily fails to account for the full range of moral perspectives. Their concern is that any guidance offered by the ethics consultant will privilege and empower one party’s viewpoint over—and to the exclusion of—other stakeholders. This could lead to serious harms, such as the ethicist being reduced to a means to an end for a clinician seeking to achieve his or her own preferred outcome, the ethicist denying the broader array of stakeholders input in the process, or the ethicist providing wrongheaded or biased advice, posing dangers to the ethical quality of decision-making. Although these concerns are important and must be addressed, we suggest that they are manageable. This paper proposes using conflict coaching, a practice developed within the discipline of conflict management, to mitigate the risks posed by curbside consultation, and thereby create new “spaces” for moral discourse in the care of patients. Thinking of curbside consultations as an opportunity for “clinical ethics conflict coaching” can more fully integrate ethics committee members into the daily ethics of patient care and reduce the frequency of ethically harmful outcomes.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. (1998). Core competencies for health care ethics consultation. Glenview, IL: American Society for Bioethics and Humanities.
DeRenzo, E. G., Vinicky, J., Redman, B., Lynch, J. J., Panzarella, P., & Rizk, S. (2006). Rounding: a model for consultation and training whose time has come. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 15, 207–215.
Duval, G., Sartorius, L., Clarridge, B., Gensler, G., & Danis, M. (2001). What triggers requests for ethics consultations? Journal of Medical Ethics, 27(Suppl 1), i24–i29.
Duval, G., Clarridge, B., Gensler, G., & Danis, M. (2004). A national survey of U.S. internists’ experiences with ethical dilemmas and ethics consultation. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 19, 251–258.
Fox, E., Myers, S., & Pearlman, R. A. (2007). Ethics consultation in United States hospitals: a national survey. The American Journal of Bioethics, 7(2), 13–25.
Golub, R. M. (1998). Curbside consultations and the viaduct effect. JAMA, 280(10), 929–930.
Hurst, S. A., Hull, S. C., DuVal, G., & Danis, M. (2003). How physicians face ethical difficulties: a qualitative analysis. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31, 7–14.
Jones, T. S., & Brinkert, R. (2007). Conflict coaching: Conflict management strategies and skills for the individual. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Kuo, D., Gifford, D. R., & Stein, M. D. (1998). Curbside consultation practices and attitudes among primary care physicians and medical subspecialists. JAMA, 280(10), 905–909.
Mayer, B. (2000). The dynamics of conflict resolution. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Menkel-Meadow, C., Love, L. P., Schneider, A. K., & Sternlight, J. R. (Eds). (2005). Dispute resolution: Beyond the adversarial model. New York, NY: Aspen Publications.
Mokwunye, N. (2009). Clinical ethics patient assessment: not another checklist! Physician Newsletter September/October. [On-line] www.whcenter.org/body.cfm?id=1284:17. Accessed 12 Nov 2009.
Moore, C. W. (2003). The mediation process (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
O’Reilly, K. B. (2008). Willing, but waiting: hospital ethics committees. Amednews.com. [On-line] www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/01/28/prsa0128.htm. Accessed 22 June 2009.
Olick, R. S., & Bergus, G. R. (2003). Malpractice liability for informal consultations. Family Medicine, 5(7), 476–481.
Peleg, A., Peleg, R., Porath, A., & Horowitz, Y. (1999). Hallway medicine: prevalence, characteristics and attitudes of hospital physicians. IMAJ, 1, 241–244.
Perley, C. M. (2006). Physician use of the curbside consultation to address information needs: report on a collective case study. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 94(2), 137–144.
Rubin, S. B. (2002). Beyond the authoritative voice: casting a wide net in ethics consultation. In R. Charon & M. Montello (Eds.), Stories matter: the role of narrative in medical ethics (pp. 110–118). New York: Routledge.
Smith, M. L., et al. (2004). Criteria for determining the appropriate method for an ethics consultation. HEC Forum, 16(2), 95–113.
Sokol, D. (2009). Rethinking ward rounds. BMJ, 338, 571.
Stacey, D., Murray, M. A., Légaré, F., Dunn, S., Prudy, M., & O’Connor, A. (2008). Decision coaching to support shared decision-making: a framework, evidence, and implications for nursing practice, education, and policy. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 5(1), 25–35.
Tidwell, A. (1997). Problem solving for one. Mediation Quarterly, 14(4), 309–317.
Walker, M. U. (1993). Keeping moral space open. Hastings Center Report, 23(2), 33–41.
Wilmot, J. L., & Hocker, W. W. (2001). Interpersonal conflict (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Edelstein, L.M., Lynch, J.J., Mokwunye, N.O. et al. Curbside Consultation Re-imagined: Borrowing from the Conflict Management Toolkit. HEC Forum 22, 41–49 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-010-9120-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-010-9120-y