35 found
Order:
Disambiguations
Jonathan Ives [34]Jonathan C. S. Ives [1]
  1.  33
    Standards of Practice in Empirical Bioethics Research: Towards a Consensus.Jonathan Ives, Michael Dunn, Bert Molewijk, Jan Schildmann, Kristine Bærøe, Lucy Frith, Richard Huxtable, Elleke Landeweer, Marcel Mertz, Veerle Provoost, Annette Rid, Sabine Salloch, Mark Sheehan, Daniel Strech, Martine de Vries & Guy Widdershoven - 2018 - BMC Medical Ethics 19 (1):68.
    This paper responds to the commentaries from Stacy Carter and Alan Cribb. We pick up on two main themes in our response. First, we reflect on how the process of setting standards for empirical bioethics research entails drawing boundaries around what research counts as empirical bioethics research, and we discuss whether the standards agreed in the consensus process draw these boundaries correctly. Second, we expand on the discussion in the original paper of the role and significance of the concept of (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  2.  23
    A Systematic Review of Empirical Bioethics Methodologies.Rachel Davies, Jonathan C. S. Ives & Michael Dunn - 2015 - BMC Medical Ethics 16 (1):15.
    Despite the increased prevalence of bioethics research that seeks to use empirical data to answer normative research questions, there is no consensus as to what an appropriate methodology for this would be. This review aims to search the literature, present and critically discuss published Empirical Bioethics methodologies.
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   34 citations  
  3.  72
    Appropriate Methodologies for Empirical Bioethics: It's All Relative.Jonathan Ives & Heather Draper - 2009 - Bioethics 23 (4):249-258.
    In this article we distinguish between philosophical bioethics (PB), descriptive policy orientated bioethics (DPOB) and normative policy oriented bioethics (NPOB). We argue that finding an appropriate methodology for combining empirical data and moral theory depends on what the aims of the research endeavour are, and that, for the most part, this combination is only required for NPOB. After briefly discussing the debate around the is/ought problem, and suggesting that both sides of this debate are misunderstanding one another (i.e. one side (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   37 citations  
  4.  4
    What is ‘Moral Distress’? A Narrative Synthesis of the Literature.Georgina Morley, Jonathan Ives, Caroline Bradbury-Jones & Fiona Irvine - forthcoming - Nursing Ethics:096973301772435.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  5.  11
    Mapping, Framing, Shaping: A Framework for Empirical Bioethics Research Projects.Richard Huxtable & Jonathan Ives - 2019 - BMC Medical Ethics 20 (1):1-8.
    Background There is growing interest in the use and incorporation of empirical data in bioethics research. Much of the recent focus has been on specific “empirical bioethics” methodologies, which attempt to integrate the empirical and the normative. Researchers in the field are, however, beginning to explore broader questions, including around acceptable standards of practice for undertaking such research. The framework: In this article, we further widen the focus to consider the overall shape of an empirical bioethics research project. We outline (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  6.  44
    A Method of Reflexive Balancing in a Pragmatic, Interdisciplinary and Reflexive Bioethics.Jonathan Ives - 2014 - Bioethics 28 (6):302-312.
    In recent years there has been a wealth of literature arguing the need for empirical and interdisciplinary approaches to bioethics, based on the premise that an empirically informed ethical analysis is more grounded, contextually sensitive and therefore more relevant to clinical practice than an ‘abstract’ philosophical analysis. Bioethics has (arguably) always been an interdisciplinary field, and the rise of ‘empirical’ (bio)ethics need not be seen as an attempt to give a new name to the longstanding practice of interdisciplinary collaboration, but (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  7.  50
    Who's Arguing? A Call for Reflexivity in Bioethics.Jonathan Ives & Michael Dunn - 2010 - Bioethics 24 (5):256-265.
    In this paper we set forth what we believe to be a relatively controversial argument, claiming that 'bioethics' needs to undergo a fundamental change in the way it is practised. This change, we argue, requires philosophical bioethicists to adopt reflexive practices when applying their analyses in public forums, acknowledging openly that bioethics is an embedded socio-cultural practice, shaped by the ever-changing intuitions of individual philosophers, which cannot be viewed as a detached intellectual endeavour. This said, we argue that in order (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  8.  6
    Moral Distress and Austerity: An Avoidable Ethical Challenge in Healthcare.Georgina Morley, Jonathan Ives & Caroline Bradbury-Jones - 2019 - Health Care Analysis 27 (3):185-201.
    Austerity, by its very nature, imposes constraints by limiting the options for action available to us because certain courses of action are too costly or insufficiently cost effective. In the context of healthcare, the constraints imposed by austerity come in various forms; ranging from the availability of certain treatments being reduced or withdrawn completely, to reductions in staffing that mean healthcare professionals must ration the time they make available to each patient. As austerity has taken hold, across the United Kingdom (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  9.  38
    ‘Encounters with Experience’: Empirical Bioethics and the Future. [REVIEW]Jonathan Ives - 2008 - Health Care Analysis 16 (1):1-6.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  10.  8
    Reasons to Redefine Moral Distress: A Feminist Empirical Bioethics Analysis.Georgina Morley, Caroline Bradbury-Jones & Jonathan Ives - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (1):61-71.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  11.  28
    Altruism in Organ Donation: An Unnecessary Requirement?: Table 1.Greg Moorlock, Jonathan Ives & Heather Draper - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (2):134-138.
    Altruism has long been taken to be the guiding principle of ethical organ donation in the UK, and has been used as justification for rejecting or allowing certain types of donation. We argue that, despite this prominent role, altruism has been poorly defined in policy and position documents, and used confusingly and inconsistently. Looking at how the term has been used over recent years allows us to define ‘organ donation altruism’, and comparing this with accounts in the philosophical literature highlights (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  12.  38
    Methodology, Epistemology, and Empirical Bioethics Research: A Constructive/Ist Commentary.Michael Dunn & Jonathan Ives - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (6-7):93-95.
  13.  14
    Have We Made Progress in Identifying (Surgical) Innovation?Giles Birchley, Richard Huxtable, Jonathan Ives & Jane Blazeby - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (6):25-27.
    Volume 19, Issue 6, June 2019, Page 25-27.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14.  26
    Setting Standards for Empirical Bioethics Research: A Response to Carter and Cribb.Michael Dunn, Jonathan Ives, Bert Molewijk & Jan Schildmann - 2018 - BMC Medical Ethics 19 (1):66.
    This paper responds to the commentaries from Stacy Carter and Alan Cribb. We pick up on two main themes in our response. First, we reflect on how the process of setting standards for empirical bioethics research entails drawing boundaries around what research counts as empirical bioethics research, and we discuss whether the standards agreed in the consensus process draw these boundaries correctly. Second, we expand on the discussion in the original paper of the role and significance of the concept of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (9 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15.  57
    IEEN Workshop Report: Aims and Methods in Interdisciplinary and Empirical Bioethics.John Owens, Jonathan Ives & Alan Cribb - 2012 - Clinical Ethics 7 (4):157-160.
    Bioethics is a diverse field that accommodates a broad range of perspectives and disciplines. The recent explosion of literature on methods in interdisciplinary and empirical ethics might appear, however, to overshadow the fact that ‘bioethics’ has long been an interdisciplinary field. The Interdisciplinary and Empirical Ethics Network (IEEN) was established, with funding from the Wellcome Trust, to facilitate critical and constructive discussion around the nature of this disciplinary diversity and shift focus away from the ‘empirical turn’, towards the ongoing development (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  16.  32
    PPI, Paradoxes and Plato: Who's Sailing the Ship?: Table 1.Jonathan Ives, Sarah Damery & Sabi Redwod - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (3):181-185.
    Over the last decade, patient and public involvement (PPI) has become a requisite in applied health research. Some funding bodies demand explicit evidence of PPI, while others have made a commitment to developing PPI in the projects they fund. Despite being commonplace, there remains a dearth of engagement with the ethical and theoretical underpinnings of PPI processes and practices. More specifically, while there is a small (but growing) body of literature examining the effectiveness and impact of PPI, there has been (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  17.  50
    Getting From the Ethical to the Empirical and Back Again: The Danger of Getting It Wrong, and the Possibilities for Getting It Right: 2008 Bioethics Special Edition: Editorial 2. [REVIEW]Anna Smajdor, Jonathan Ives, Emma Baldock & Adele Langlois - 2008 - Health Care Analysis 16 (1):7-16.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  18.  9
    Methodology and Myopia? Some Praise, a Problem, and a Plea.Jonathan Ives - 2016 - Hastings Center Report 46 (5):46-47.
    In “A Conceptual Model for the Translation of Bioethics Research and Scholarship,” Debra Mathews et al. aim to “begin an important discussion” about how to measure success in bioethics, and in doing so they set out a typology of bioethics research and scholarship with the arguably correct assumption that we cannot evaluate success in bioethics without first understanding what its goals are. I think the authors are correct in their claim that, in the current academic climate, having work in bioethics (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  19.  23
    Jack of All Trades, Master of None? Challenges Facing Junior Academic Researchers in Bioethics.Michael C. Dunn, Zeynep Gurtin-Broadbent, Jessica R. Wheeler & Jonathan Ives - 2008 - Clinical Ethics 3 (4):160-163.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  20.  9
    Conceptualising Surgical Innovation: An Eliminativist Proposal.Giles Birchley, Jonathan Ives, Richard Huxtable & Jane Blazeby - 2020 - Health Care Analysis 28 (1):73-97.
    Improving surgical interventions is key to improving outcomes. Ensuring the safe and transparent translation of such improvements is essential. Evaluation and governance initiatives, including the IDEAL framework and the Macquarie Surgical Innovation Identification Tool have begun to address this. Yet without a definition of innovation that allows non-surgeons to identify when it is occurring, these initiatives are of limited value. A definition seems elusive, so we undertook a conceptual study of surgical innovation. This indicated common conceptual areas in discussions of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  19
    On Classifying the Field of Medical Ethics.Kristine Bærøe, Jonathan Ives, Martine de Vries & Jan Schildmann - 2017 - BMC Medical Ethics 18 (1):30.
    In 2014, the editorial board of BMC Medical Ethics came together to devise sections for the journal that would give structure to the journal help ensure that authors’ research is matched to the most appropriate editors and help readers to find the research most relevant to them. The editorial board decided to take a practical approach to devising sections that dealt with the challenges of content management. After that, we started thinking more theoretically about how one could go about classifying (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22.  8
    Compassionate Care During Withdrawal of Treatment: A Secondary Analysis of ICU Nurses' Experiences.Nikolaos Efstathiou & Jonathan Ives - 2018 - Nursing Ethics 25 (8):1075-1086.
    Background: Withdrawal of treatment is a common practice in intensive care units when treatment is considered futile. Compassion is an important aspect of care; however, it has not been explored much within the context of treatment withdrawal in intensive care units. Objectives: The aim was to examine how concepts of compassion are framed, utilised and communicated by intensive care nurses in the context of treatment withdrawal. Design: The study employed a qualitative approach conducting secondary analysis of an original data set. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23.  4
    Principles for Pandemics: COVID-19 and Professional Ethical Guidance in England and Wales.Richard Huxtable, Jonathan Ives, Giles Birchley, Mari-Rose Kennedy, Peta Coulson-Smith & Helen Smith - 2021 - BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1):1-15.
    BackgroundDuring the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic, various professional ethical guidance was issued to health and social care professionals in England and Wales. Guidance can help to inform and support such professionals and their patients, clients and service users, but a plethora of guidance risked information overload, confusion, and inconsistency. MethodsDuring the early months of the pandemic, we undertook a rapid review, asking: what are the principles adopted by professional ethical guidance in England and Wales for dealing with COVID-19? We (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24.  82
    Does a Belief in God Lead to Moral Cowardice?: The Difference Between Courage of Moral Conviction and Acquisition: Ives Does a Belief in God Lead to Moral Cowardice?Jonathan Ives - 2008 - Think 7 (20):57-68.
    In our seventh and final piece on the theme “Good without God”, Jonathan Ives argues that reliance on God as an external source of moral authority leads to a kind of moral cowardice.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25.  5
    Dialysis Decisions Concerning Cognitively Impaired Adults: A Scoping Literature Review.Jonathan Ives & Jordan A. Parsons - 2021 - BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1):1-17.
    BackgroundChronic kidney disease is a significant cause of global deaths. Those who progress to end-stage kidney disease often commence dialysis as a life-extending treatment. For cognitively impaired patients, the decision as to whether they commence dialysis will fall to someone else. This scoping review was conducted to map existing literature pertaining to how decisions about dialysis are and should be made with, for, and on behalf of adult patients who lack decision-making capacity. In doing so, it forms the basis of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  7
    Implementation Science and Bioethics: Lessons From European Empirical Bioethics Research?Jonathan Ives, Giles Birchley & Richard Huxtable - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (4):80-82.
    Volume 20, Issue 4, May 2020, Page 80-82.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27.  55
    IEEN Workshop Report: Teaching and Learning in Interdisciplinary and Empirical Ethics.Jonathan Ives, John Owens & Alan Cribb - 2013 - Clinical Ethics 8 (2-3):70-74.
    Bioethics is an interdisciplinary field that accommodates a broad range of perspectives and disciplines. This inherent diversity sets a number of challenges for both teachers and students of bioethics, notably in respect to the appropriate aims and methods of bioethics education, standards and criteria for evaluating performance and disciplinary identity. The Interdisciplinary and Empirical Ethics Network (IEEN) was established, with funding from the Wellcome Trust, to facilitate critical and constructive discussion about the ongoing development of bioethics as an evolving field (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28.  18
    L.I.F.E. And D.E.A.T.H.Jonathan Ives - 2007 - Health Care Analysis 15 (3):257-259.
    In this short, rhetorical article, I offer a thought experiment that seeks to make an analogy between ‘life’ and ‘disease’. This article was written whilst under the influence of Nietzsche, and I hope that readers will not mistake the polemical style and the occasional nod towards humour for flippancy. This is a serious subject, and this article attempts to ask, inexplicitly, a serious question. If we do suspend our subjective value judgements about life, and strip away what might be considered (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. License to Kill: A New Model for Excusing Medically Assisted Dying?Jonathan Ives & Richard Huxtable - 1st ed. 2015 - In Jukka Varelius & Michael Cholbi (eds.), New Directions in the Ethics of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. Springer Verlag.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30.  22
    Who Gets the Gametes? An Argument for a Points System for Fertility Patients.Simon Jenkins, Jonathan Ives, Sue Avery & Heather Draper - 2018 - Bioethics 32 (1):16-26.
    This paper argues that the convention of allocating donated gametes on a ‘first come, first served’ basis should be replaced with an allocation system that takes into account more morally relevant criteria than waiting time. This conclusion was developed using an empirical bioethics methodology, which involved a study of the views of 18 staff members from seven U.K. fertility clinics, and 20 academics, policy-makers, representatives of patient groups, and other relevant professionals, on the allocation of donated sperm and eggs. Against (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31.  31
    Should We Reject Donated Organs on Moral Grounds or Permit Allocation Using Non‐Medical Criteria?: A Qualitative Study.Greg Moorlock, Jonathan Ives, Simon Bramhall & Heather Draper - 2016 - Bioethics 30 (4):282-292.
    Conditional and directed deceased organ donations occur when donors attempt to influence the allocation of their donated organs. This can include asking that the organs are given to or withheld from certain types of people, or that they are given to specified individuals. Donations of these types have raised ethical concerns, and have been prohibited in many countries, including the UK. In this article we report the findings from a qualitative study involving interviews with potential donors, potential recipients and transplant (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. Protocol for a Scoping Review to Understand What is Known About How GPs Make Decisions with, for and on Behalf of Patients Who Lack Capacity.Simon Jack Ogden, Richard Huxtable & Jonathan Ives - 2020 - BMJ Open 10.
    General Practitioners (GPs) and allied healthcare professionals working in primary care are regularly required to make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity. In England and Wales, these decisions are made for incapacitated adult patients under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, which primarily requires that decisions are made in the patient’s ‘best interests’. Regarding children, decisions are also made in their best interests but are done so under the Children Act 1989, which places paramount importance on (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33.  9
    IEEN Workshop Report: Professionalism in Interdisciplinary and Empirical Bioethics.John Owens, Jonathan Ives & Alan Cribb - 2014 - Clinical Ethics 9 (4):109-112.
    The Interdisciplinary and Empirical Ethics Network was established in 2012 with funding from the Wellcome Trust in order to facilitate critical and constructive discussion around the nature of the disciplinary diversity within bioethics and to consider the ongoing development of bioethics as an evolving field of interdisciplinary study. In April 2013, the Interdisciplinary and Empirical Ethics Network organized a workshop at the Centre for Public Policy Research, King’s College London, which discussed the nature and possibility of professionalism within interdisciplinary and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34.  16
    “Dunkirk Spirit:” Differences Between United Kingdom and United States Responses to Pandemic Influenza.Tom Sorell, Heather Draper, Sarah Damery & Jonathan Ives - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (11):21-22.
  35.  6
    Vaccine Confidence, Public Understanding and Probity: Time for a Shift in Focus?Ana Wheelock & Jonathan Ives - forthcoming - Journal of Medical Ethics:medethics-2020-106805.
    Lack of vaccine confidence can contribute to drops in vaccination coverage and subsequent outbreaks of diseases like measles and polio. Low trust in vaccines is attributed to a combination of factors, including lack of understanding, vaccine scares, flawed policies, social media and mistrust of vaccine manufacturers, scientists and decision-makers. The COVID-19 crisis has laid bare societies’ vulnerability to new pathogens and the critical role of vaccines in containing this and future pandemics. It has also put science at the forefront of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark