The primary objective of The Health Care Ethics Con sultant is to focus attention on an immediate practical problem: the role and responsibilities, the education and training, and the certification and accreditation of health care ethics consultants. The principal questions addressed in this book include: Who should be considered health care ethics consultants? Whom should they advise? What should be their responsi bilities and what kind of training should they have? (...) Should there be some kind of accreditation or certification program to ensure that those who call themselves ethics consultants are in fact qualified to advise, consult, research, and write in health care ethics? The distinguished authors ofthese articles are persons with diverse backgrounds, interests, presumptions, and val ues. Not surprisingly, therefore, diverse responses have emerged to the questions posed. Though the book's chapters are individually authored, they are informed by the group discussions that went on during active workshop sessions, and by knowledge of the contributions of others. All of the chapters meaningfully represent their consensus. This is not to say that there were no disagreements regarding specific details, but rather that there were no fundamental objections on the book's basic content among a panel of authors who share basic premises regarding the role, responsibilities, education, and certifica tion of health care ethics consultants. (shrink)

Ethics support in primary health care has been sparser than in hospitals, the need for ethics support is probably no less. We have, however, limited knowledge about how to develop ethics support that responds to primary health-care workers’ needs. In this article, we present a survey with a mixture of closed- and open-ended questions concerning: How frequent and how distressed various types of ethical challenges make the primary health-care (...) workers feel, how important they think it is to deal with these challenges better and what kind of ethics support they want. Five primary health-care institutions participated. Ethical challenges seem to be prominent and common. Most frequently, the participants experienced ethical challenges related to scarce resources and lack of knowledge and skills. Furthermore, ethical challenges related to communication and decision making were common. The participants welcomed ethics support responding to their challenges and being integrated in their daily practices. (shrink)

This paper discusses two interrelated concepts: (1) the ethics of planned social change and (2) primary health care. It takes the World Health Organization’s definition of primary health care as a point of departure to examine four identified potential areas where ethical dilemmas may occur. In addition, questions are raised about nursing education, as well as about the class and status differences between nurses and patients and communities. It takes the position that (...) our first task is to encourage more discussion and examination of ethical issues in the planned social change of primary health care. (shrink)

The lack of primary healthcare integration has been identified as one of the main limits to programs’ efficacy in low- and middle-income countries. This is especially relevant to the Millennium Development Goals, whose health objectives were not attained in many countries at their term in 2015. While global health scholars and decision-makers are unanimous in calling for integration, the objective here is to go further and contribute to its promotion by presenting two of the most important challenges (...) to be met for its achievement: 1) developing a “crosswise approach” to implementation that is operational and effective; and 2) creating synergy between national programs and interventions driven by non-State actors. The argument for urgently addressing this double challenge is illustrated by drawing on observations made and lessons learned during a four-year research project evaluating the effects of interventions against malaria in Burkina Faso. The way interventions were framed was mostly vertical, leaving little room for local adaptation. In addition, many non-governmental organizations intervened and contributed to a fragmented and heteronomous health governance system. Important ethical issues stem from how interventions against malaria were shaped and implemented in Burkina Faso. To further explore this issue, a scoping literature review was conducted in August 2016 on the theme of integrated primary healthcare. It revealed that no clear definition of the concept has been advanced or endorsed thus far. We call for caution in conceptualizing it as a simple juxtaposition of different tasks or missions at the primary care level. It is time to go beyond the debate around selective versus comprehensive approaches or fragmentation versus cohesion. Integration should be thought of as a process to reconcile these tensions. In the context that characterizes many low- and middle-income countries today, better aid coordination and public health systems strengthening, as promoted by multisectoral approaches, might be among the best options to sustainably and ethically integrate primary healthcare interventions. (shrink)

The mass childhood immunization programme has traditionally been viewed as a safe and effective preventative measure by health promoters, primary health care professionals and governments. This consensus has meant that immunization has rarely been viewed as ethically problematic. A number of recent changes in the context of the delivery of health care, particularly the emphasis on consumerism and the effect of the marketization of services, makes timely an examination of ethical, social and political issues. (...) This article examines four main grounds for problematizing the mass childhood immunization programme. These are: clinical research evidence about the safety and efficacy of vaccines; the masking of wider social and political determinants of ill health; the contradictory strictures about collective and individual rights in relation to immunization; and the uniqueness of childhood immunization as a physical intrusion into a healthy body. The implications of these ethical issues are discussed in relation to informed consent and the need for a 'greenfield' review that includes the views of dissenting parents, lawyers and moral philosophers, as well as health professionals. Les promoteurs de santé, les soignants et les gouvernements ont tous traditionellement vu le programme d'immunisation globale des enfants comme sain et efficace. Cela voulait dire que l'immunisation a rarement posé un problème éthique. Pourtant, actuellement des changements dans les contextes de la distribution des soins, le consumérisme et de l'effet de la commercialisation des services de santé, exigent une revue des problèmes éthiques, sociaux et politiques. Cet article discute quatre éléments problématiques du programme d'immunisation globale: les données des recherches médicales sur la sûreté et l'efficacité des vaccins; la dissimulation des déterminatifs sociaux et politiques des maladies; les critiques contradictoires des droits individuels et collectifs concernant l'immunisation; et le caractère unique de l'immunisation des enfants comme une intrusion physique dans un corps sain. Les effets de ces questions éthiques sont repris en rapport du consentement informé et de la nécessité d'une revue 'verte' qui comprend les vues des parents dissidents, des juristes, des philsophes et des membres des professions soignantes. Das Massenimpfungsprogramm von Kindern wurde allgemein von Gesundheits behörden, medizinischem Fachpersonal und Regierungen als sichere und wirksame Vorbeugungsmassnahme betrachtet. Diese Uebereinstimmung bedeutete, dass Imp fungen selten ein ethisches Problem darstellten. Eine Anzahl von Aenderungen im Gesundheitswesen - besonders im Hinblickin auf Konsum und Marktwirtschaft im Dienstleistungsbereich - berechtigen jedoch zu einer Untersuchung der ethischen, sozialen und politischen Fragen. Dieser Artikel untersucht vier Hauptgründe, die das Massenimpfungsprogramm für Kinder in Frage stellen: Forschungsergebnisse über die Sicherheit und Wirksamkeit der Impfstoffe; die Verschleierung von andern sozialen und politischen Krankheitsursachen; die widersprüchlichen Anordnungen über kollektive und individuelle Rechte mit Bezug auf die Impfungen; und die aussergewöhnliche Art der Impfung als physische Verletzung eines gesunden Körpers. Die Bedeutung dieser ethischen Fragen werden hier diskutiert im Zusammenhang mit der informierten Vereinstimmung und der Notwendigkeit eines 'grünen' Ueberblickes, der die Ansichten andersdenkender Eltern, Rechtsanwalte, Philosophen und Gesund heitsexperten einschliesst. (shrink)

This Handbook offers much-needed insights into the ethics of primary healthcare. Topics range from the issues arising in primary care interactions, to working with different sources of vulnerability among patients, from contexts connected with teaching and learning, to issues in relation to justice and resources.

This book is a comprehensive and unique text and reference in medical ethics. By far the most inclusive set of primary documents and articles in the field ever published, it contains over 100 selections. Virtually all pieces appear in their entirety, and a significant number would be difficult to obtain elsewhere. The volume draws upon the literature of history, medicine, philosophical and religious ethics, economics, and sociology. A wide range of topics and issues are covered, such as (...) law and medicine, truth-telling by the physician, research, population policy, genetics, abortion, dying, and individual rights in medical care. The selections span the centuries, beginning with material from the works of Hippocrates, continuing through Thomas Percival, John Stuart Mill, and Claude Bernard, down to modern commentators like Henry K. Beecher, Walsh McDermott, David L. Bazelon, Paul Freund, H. L. A. Hart, John Rawls, Paul Ramsey, Richard McCormick, Rashi Fein, and Bernard Barber. The text has eight major divisions, beginning with sections on the ethical dimensions of the physician-patient relationship in history; the moral bases of medical ethics; and regulation, compulsion, and protection of the consumer in clinical medicine and public health. Each of these sections includes key essays that appear for the first time. All of the book's major divisions contain primary documents: codes such as the Hippocratic Oath, Medieval Law for the Regulation of Medicine, and the first as well as the most recent code of the American Medical Association; court decisions, including those on Karen Quinlan and on abortion in the United States and West Germany; government documents such as the statement of the National Commission on the Protection of Human Subjects, the Tuskegee Syphilis Report, the British Parliamentary debate on euthanasia, and the Council of Europe on rights of the sick and dying; and various published guidelines such as the Harvard Medical School brain death criteria, the American Hospital Association on patient's rights, and Pope Pius XII on the prolongation of life. Cases that illustrate moral dilemmas are provided for discussion purposes. Each section is preceded by a succinct editor's introduction. The documents and essays are of practical value for practitioners and students in medicine, law, ethics, and counselling, and for individual patients and groups concerned with medical care. Through encompassing divergent viewpoints, the essays and primary documents were selected to encourage humane practices and deepen understanding of the multiple traditions that shaped and do shape the development of medicine. (shrink)

Patient responsibilities in primary health care are controversial and, by comparison, the responsibilities of high need patients are less clear. This paper aims to suggest why high need patients receiving targeted entitlements in primary health care are free to have prima facie special responsibilities; why, given this freedom, these patients morally have special responsibilities; what these responsibilities are, and how publicly funded health systems ought to be able to respond when these remain unmet. (...) It is suggested that the special responsibilities and their place in public policy acquire moral significance as a means to discharge a moral debt, share special knowledge, and produce desirable consequences in regard to personal and collective interests. Special responsibilities magnify ordinary patient responsibilities and require patients not to hesitate regarding attendance for primary health care. Persistent patient disregard of special responsibilities may necessitate limiting the scope of these responsibilities, removing system barriers, or respecifying special rights. (shrink)

The practice of health-care professional involvement in capital punishment has come under scrutiny since the implementation of lethal injection as a method of execution, raising questions of the goals of medicine and the ethics of medicalized procedures. The American Medical Association and other professional associations have issued statements prohibiting physician involvement in capital punishment because medicine is dedicated to preserving life. I address the three primary arguments against health-care professionals being involved in lethal injection (...) and argue that they are not strong enough to prohibit physician involvement in the lethal injection process. (shrink)

The popularity and availability of global health experiences has increased, with organizations helping groups plan service trips and companies specializing in “voluntourism,” health care professionals volunteering their services through different organizations, and medical students participating in global health electives. Much has been written about global health experiences in resource poor settings, but the literature focuses primarily on the work of health care professionals and medical students. This paper focuses on undergraduate student involvement in (...) short term medical volunteer work in resource poor countries, a practice that has become popular among pre-health professions students. We argue that the participation of undergraduate students in global health experiences raises many of the ethical concerns associated with voluntourism and global health experiences for medical students. Some of these may be exacerbated by or emerge in unique ways when undergraduates volunteer. Guidelines and curricula for medical student engagement in global health experiences have been developed. Guidelines specific to undergraduate involvement in such trips and pre-departure curricula to prepare students should be developed and such training should be required of volunteers. We propose a framework for such guidelines and curricula, argue that universities should be the primary point of delivery even when universities are not organizing the trips, and recommend that curricula should be developed in light of additional data. (shrink)

Social and structural inequities shape health and illness; they are an everyday presence within the doctor-patient encounter yet, there is limited ethical guidance on what individual physicians should do. This paper draws on a study that explored how doctors and their professional associations ought to respond to the issue of social health inequities.

This paper reports on an interpretive research project which examines the feasibility of implementing social audit within the general medical practice setting. The study aims to communicate patients' voices to aid evaluation of the potential contribution of social audit to the public health sector and also addresses particular conceptual problems which arise when attempting to implement social audit within this environment. The fieldwork focuses on one general health practice in Lanarkshire (in southern central Scotland). Consultative focus group discussions (...) and individual interviews were carried out with a sample of twenty two patients. Patients were most concerned with health service organisational and delivery issues. Overall, the results suggest patients are enthusiastic about the ideas and process of the social audit. Patients were able to demonstrate a capacity for grasping accountability issues and balanced reasoning. There was an acute awareness of the constraints which exist in the public services. Patients addressed the broad rights and responsibilities issues, and highlighted the possible pitfalls of relying on a representational mechanism for ensuring their voices were heard. The study concludes that an involved and negotiative dialogue process of implementing social audit could provide beneficial understanding and ideas to the organisation which may be further researched. (shrink)

Very few data exist in France on: (1) nurses’ knowledge and behaviour concerning ethical decisions in clinical practice; and (2) their knowledge of ethical rules in clinical research. This questionnaire-based audit tried mainly to assess these questions in a large French university teaching hospital. Of the 257 questionnaires distributed to nurses in 23 clinical units of the hospital, 206 were returned (80% response rate). When responding to the vignette describing a clinical situation requiring an ethical decision to be made, most (...) nurses acted as the patient’s advocate although they have had no formal training in ethics. Indeed, 66% of nurses responding considered that the patients themselves should be the primary decision makers in situations that relate to their health and medical care. For children or comatose patients, the decision should be left to the relatives according to 72% of the responses. The results indicated that the role of health care professionals in ethical decisions made for a given patient should be marginal. Nurses’ knowledge concerning research protocols, particularly their ethical requirements and consequences, is poor at present and information from and communication with doctors should be improved. (shrink)

Very few data exist in France on: nurses’ knowledge and behaviour concerning ethical decisions in clinical practice; and their knowledge of ethical rules in clinical research. This questionnaire-based audit tried mainly to assess these questions in a large French university teaching hospital. Of the 257 questionnaires distributed to nurses in 23 clinical units of the hospital, 206 were returned. When responding to the vignette describing a clinical situation requiring an ethical decision to be made, most nurses acted as the patient’s (...) advocate although they have had no formal training in ethics. Indeed, 66% of nurses responding considered that the patients themselves should be the primary decision makers in situations that relate to their health and medical care. For children or comatose patients, the decision should be left to the relatives according to 72% of the responses. The results indicated that the role of health care professionals in ethical decisions made for a given patient should be marginal. Nurses’ knowledge concerning research protocols, particularly their ethical requirements and consequences, is poor at present and information from and communication with doctors should be improved. (shrink)

Health care systems in different countries and cultures differ and tend toreflect the particular values and, therefore, the particular socialstructure of a given society. Each of these has ethical problems unique toitself. Some of these problems are briefly discussed. So as to have anindividual ethical problem in the context of medical care, access tomedical care needs to be assured. It is argued that individual problems arethe primary issue in societies in which there is fair access (...) whereas theyare of lesser importance in societies which have thus far failed toprovide fair access. (shrink)

This paper considers whether a physician is criminally liable for administering a dose of painkillers that hastens a patient's death. The common wisdom is that a version of the doctrine of double effect legally protects the physician. That is, a physician is supposedly acting lawfully so long as the physician's primary purpose is to relieve suffering. This paper suggests that the criminal liability issue is more complex than that. Physician culpability can be based on recklessness, and recklessness hinges on (...) whether a physician has taken an unjustifiable risk of hastening death. The authors identify three conditions of justifiability. Their analysis helps to explain the distinction between euthanasia, which is legally banned, and the use of risky analgesics, which is permitted in limited circumstances. (shrink)

In bioethics and health policy, we often discuss the appropriate boundaries of public funding; how the interface of public and private purchasers and providers should be organized and regulated receives less attention. In this paper, I discuss ethical and regulatory issues raised at this interface by three medical practice models in which physicians provide insured services while requiring or requesting that patients pay for services or for the non-insured services of the physicians themselves or their associates. This choice for (...) such practice models is different from the decision to design an insurance plan to include or exclude user fees, co-payments and deductibles. I analyze the issues raised with regards to familiar health care values of equity and efficiency, while highlighting additional concerns about fair terms of access, provider integrity, and fair competition. I then analyze the common Canadian regulatory response to block fee models, considering their extension to wellness clinics, with regards to fiduciary standards governing the physician–patient relationship and the role of informed consent. I close by highlighting briefly issues that are of common concern across different fundamental normative frameworks for health policy. (shrink)

The health care systems are fairly similar in theScandinavian countries. The exact details vary, but inall three countries the system is almost exclusivelypublicly funded through taxation, and most (or all)hospitals are also publicly owned and managed. Thecountries also have a fairly strong primary caresector (even though it varies between the countries),with family physicians to various degrees acting asgatekeepers to specialist services. In Denmark most ofthe GP services are free. For the patient in Norwayand Sweden there are out-of-pocket (...) co-payments for GPconsultations, with upper limits, but consultations forchildren are free. Hospital treatment is free inDenmark while the other countries use a system without-of-pocket co-payment. There is a very strongpublic commitment to access to high quality healthcare for all. Solidarity and equality form theideological basis for the Scandinavian welfare state.Means testing, for instance, has been widely rejectedin the Scandinavian countries on the grounds thatpublic services should not stigmatise any particulargroup. Solidarity also means devoting specialconsideration to the needs of those who have lesschance than others of making their voices heard orexercising their rights. Issues of limited access arenow, however, challenging the thinking about a healthcare system based on solidarity. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Managed Health Care: New Ethical Issues for All*Martina Darragh (bio) and Pat Milmoe McCarrick (bio)Changes in the way that health care is perceived, delivered, and financed have occurred rapidly in a relatively short time span. The 50-year period since World War II encompasses enormous growth in medical technology, soaring health care costs, and significant fragmentation of the two-party patient- physician relationship. This relationship (...) first grew to include the third-party payer, the health insurance industry, and now “with great speed and relatively little public awareness, a significant change has occurred in the way some decisions are made about a patient’s medical care” (III, Institute of Medicine 1989).The new means of providing health care bring an increasing number of parties into clinical decision-making processes. With this change, ethical issues that once concerned only health care professionals, the physician or the nurse, have expanded to include the patient and the groups who “manage” care—e.g., health maintenance organizations (HMOs), preferred provider organizations (PPOs), point of service groups (POSs), independent practice associations (IPAs), insurance reviewers, hospital administrators, institutional managers, and, the most recent players, purchasers of group health care who base their decisions on competitive pricing.The term “managed care” refers to a variety of continually adapting and developing arrangements that involve four groups. These groups, which have been labeled by the world of business, not health, are the “consumer” (once the patient), the “provider” (the physician and other health care professionals), the “insurer” (the reimburser for any care), and the “purchaser of care” or the primary buyer of health services (the large employer organization). Capitation is a common way to pay for health services in managed care systems. A certain dollar amount is negotiated for health services for a specified number of patients whether the care is delivered or not; the provider shares with the [End Page 189] insurer any financial risk for the actual cost of care (III, Centers for Disease Control 1995).When the Clinton administration’s health care reform movement failed to gain support in the U.S. Congress, the use of managed care to control rising health care costs accelerated. The literature on managed care and its effect on the patient-physician relationship reflects this shift. During the era of health care reform, “debate centered on how managed care could control costs, on the use of technology and patient satisfaction, [and] on access and barriers to care” (IV, Emanuel and Dubler 1995). When managed care organizations began contracting with physicians to provide health care services subject to the plans’ provisions, these plans became agents in clinical decision making on a wide-spread basis. HMO enrollment grew to 51 million persons by 1994 (III, Centers for Disease Control 1995). This “corporatization” of health care has sparked a plethora of articles about the effects of the marketplace on the physician’s ability to do what is best for the patient, and on the patient’s ability to trust the physician to do so.Many authors make it clear that managed care itself is not the problem, but rather the development of for-profit managed care plans by “corporate conglomerates with billions of dollars in assets that compensate their executives as grandly as basketball players” (V, Kassirer 1995) “in a marketplace that is largely unregulated” (I, Zoloth-Dorfman and Rubin 1995). “Some, mostly older plans that were created when cost containment was an unexpected benefit rather than their central purpose, deliver high-quality care economically. Unfortunately, others cut costs by recruiting the healthiest patients, excluding the sickest, rationing care by making it inconvenient to obtain, and denying care by a variety of mechanisms” (V, Kassirer 1995).These cost-containment features now play an intimate role in clinical practice. When a managed care plan contracts with a physician, the doctor becomes a “double agent” with contractual obligations to the plan to provide a preset amount of services and professional responsibilities to each patient to authorize necessary treatment (V, Angell 1993). This duality can undermine the physician’s fiduciary responsibility to the patient wherein the physician “has power over the affairs of [the patient]...and is required by law to act on that person’s... (shrink)

An individual’s right to refuse life-sustaining treatment is a fundamental expression of patient autonomy; however, supporting this right poses ethical dilemmas for healthcare providers when the patient has attempted suicide. Emergency physicians encounter patients who have attempted suicide and are likely among the first medical providers to face the dilemma of honoring the patient’s DNR or intervening to reverse the effects of potentially fatal actions. We illustrate this issue by introducing a case example in which the DNR of a terminally (...) ill woman was not honored because the cause of her cardiac arrest was suicide. We argue that although a terminal diagnosis should change the way health care providers respond to a suicide attempt, many of the theoretical underpinnings for how one should treat suicide attempts—especially the criterion of external reasonability, that is the action to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining measures is reasonable independent of the precipitating event—are common to all situations :3–12, 2013). The presumption that patients who attempt suicide lack capacity due to acute mental illness is flawed because it fails to account for a competent individual’s reasonable preference to not be forced to live in an unbearable, terminal condition. In states without legislation allowing physician aid in dying, patients and providers must grapple with these limitations on a case-by-case basis. In cases where the patient has a limited life expectancy and there is not concern for psychiatric illness as the primary cause of the suicidal action, we argue that the negative right to refuse life-sustaining treatment should prevail. (shrink)

Health care depends on people. It is the health workforce — doctors, nurses, pharmacists, lab technicians, and nursing assistants, to mention a few — that, in large measure, determine the quality and effectiveness of any health enterprise. The nature of the health workforce was integral to the health care reform debates of the early 1990s and will surely be central in proposals to improve the quality, accessibility, and cost of U.S. health (...) class='Hi'>care in the future. Therefore, as we enter a new period of health reform deliberations and as we face the inevitability of an aging population, it is important to consider the problems and potential remediation necessary for the health workforce of the future. This article focuses particularly on physicians and nurses while recognizing the importance and frequently parallel concerns that arise across all health care disciplines. Understanding how the composition, capacity, and activities of a health care workforce must change as part of health reform requires an understanding of the context in which health professionals practice. What are the factors that govern health care today, and what are their impact on the health workforce? (shrink)

Even when turning its attention to public health topics such as preventive care and workplace wellness, the Affordable Care Act law embodies a highly individualistic paradigm of health. The provisions of the law implicitly assign the primary responsibility for prevention to individuals, who should be urged to make more responsible and healthier choices about what they consume and how they live. Relatively little in the law reflects the “population perspective” set forth in public health (...) scholarship that focuses on environmental and social determinants of health. This article explores the cultural and economic factors that led Congress to embrace a highly individualist conception of public health, and it suggests how public health advocates and legal scholars might seek to reframe the public discourse surrounding preventive health issues. (shrink)

A combination of “environmental factors” in the U.S. has led to an increased demand for health care professionals. However, there has been a significant decrease in the number of U.S. medical graduates selecting careers in family medicine and general internal medicine, thus driving demand for international medical graduates. At the heart of our national workforce policy needs to be good domestic and foreign policies, such as self-sufficiency approaches that include strategies to incentivize rural and underserved practice for U.S. (...) medical graduates. (shrink)

It is argued that the primary aim of institutional management is to protect the moral integrity of health professionals without significantly compromising other important values and interests. Institutional policies are recommended as a means to promote fair, consistent, and transparent management of conscience-based refusals. It is further recommended that those policies include the following four requirements: (1) Conscience-based refusals will be accommodated only if a requested accommodation will not impede a patient’s/surrogate’s timely access to information, counseling, and referral. (...) (2) Conscience-based refusals will be accommodated only if a requested accommodation will not impede a patient’s timely access to health care services offered within the institution. (3) Conscience-based refusals will be accommodated only if the accommodation will not impose excessive burdens on colleagues, supervisors, department heads, other administrators, or the institution. (4) Whenever feasible, health professionals should provide advance notification to department heads or supervisors. Formal review may not be required in all cases, but when it is appropriate, several recommendations are offered about standards and the review process. A key recommendation is that when reviewing an objector’s reasons, contrary to what some have proposed, it is not appropriate to adopt an adversarial approach modelled on military review boards’ assessments of requests for conscientious objector status. According to the approach recommended, the primary function of reviews of objectors’ reasons is to engage them in a process of reflecting on the nature and depth of their objections, with the objective of facilitating moral clarity on the part of objectors rather than enabling department heads, supervisors, or ethics committees to determine whether conscientious objections are sufficiently genuine. (shrink)

Do we have a legal and moral right to health care against others? There are international conventions and institutions that say emphatically yes, and they summarize this in the expression of “the right to health,” which is an established part of the international human rights canon. The International Covenant on Social and Economic Rights outlines this as “the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health,” but declarations such (...) as this remain tragically unfulfilled. According to recent figures, roughly two billion people lack access to essential drugs or to primary health care. Millions are afflicted by infections and illnesses that are easily avoidable or treatable. In the developing world many children die or grow stunted and damaged for lack of available treatments. Tropical diseases receive little or no attention by the major pharmaceutical companies’ research departments. Is this a massive violation of the right to health? And if so, why does it attract so little attention? Is it because our supposed commitment to human rights and the rule of law is hypocritical and hollow? Or is it because the right to health is a special case of a right, so that these tragedies are no violation at all? Jennifer Prah Ruger summarized this puzzle when she wrote: “one would be hard pressed to find a more controversial or nebulous human right than the right to health.” In this essay I discuss three different theories of a right to health care. I conclude by offering my own reconstruction of one such theory. (shrink)

For decades a debate has played out in the literature about who bioethicists are, what they do, whether they can be considered professionals qua bioethicists, and, if so, what professional responsibilities they are called to uphold. Health care ethics consultants are bioethicists who work in health care settings. They have been seeking guidance documents that speak to their special relationships/duties toward those they serve. By approving a Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibilities for (...) class='Hi'>Health Care Ethics Consultants, the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities (ASBH) has moved the professionalization debate forward in a significant way. This first code of ethics focuses on individuals who provide health care ethics consultation (HCEC) in clinical settings. The evolution of the code's development, implications for the field of HCEC and bioethics, and considerations for future directions are presented here. (shrink)

This paper is a commentary on a project application of telemedicine to alleviate primary health care problems in Lundazi district in the Eastern province of Zambia. The project dubbed 'The Virtual Doctor Project' will use hard body vehicles fitted with satellite communication devices and modern medical equipment to deliver primary health care services to some of the neediest areas of the country. The relevance and importance of the project lies in the fact that these (...) areas are hard-to-reach due to rugged natural terrain and have very limited telecommunications infrastructure. The lack of these and other basic services makes it difficult for medical personnel to settle in these areas, which leads to an acute shortage of medical personnel. We comment on this problem and how it is addressed by 'The Virtual Doctor Project', emphasizing that while the telemedicine concept is not new in sub-Saharan Africa, the combination of mobility and connectivity to service a number of villages 'on the go' is an important variation in the shift back to the 1978 Alma Ata principles of the United Nations World Health Organization [WHO].This overview of the Virtual Doctor Project in Zambia provides insight into both the potential for ICT, and the problems and limitations that any "real-world" articulation of this technology must confront. (shrink)

The new South African constitution commits the government to guarantee "basic health services" for every child under 18. Primary health care for pregnant women and children under six and elements of essential primary health care have received priority. At present, there is little analysis of the moral considerations involved in making choices about more advanced or costly health care which may, arguably, also be "basic". This paper illustrates some of the tensions (...) in setting priorities for a just macro-allocation of children's health care, given the realities of need and scarce resources, and the commitment to equality of basic opportunities. (shrink)

"Characterized by breadth of coverage, a refreshingly balanced approach to controversial issues, & a highly readable style."-Theological Studies.

This volume moves beyond ethics as problem-solving or ethics as etiquette to offer a look at ethics in primary care—as opposed to life-or-death—medical care. Professional Ethics and Primary Care Medicine deals with the ethics of routine, day-to-day encounters between doctors and patients. It probes beneath the hard decisions to look at the moral frameworks, habits of thought, and customs of practice that underlie choices. Harmon Smith and Larry Churchill argue that (...) primary care, far from being merely a setting for the rendering of care, provides a new understanding of both physician and patient, and thereby offers a fresh basis for medical ethics. (shrink)

This paper brings together ideas from two perspectives on ethics and health promotion. A discussion of the ethical dimension of the health promotion practice of community nurses is set in the wider context of health policy, with particular reference to health gain and individual responsibility. It is widely held that nurses have a key role to play in health promotion and that this is particularly the case for nurses working in primary health (...) care. This assumption is reinforced by policy documents from the World Health Organization, the Department of Health and statutory bodies such as the United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting. The approach of many nurses to health promotion has tended on the one hand to be somewhat naive and on the other to be authoritarian and didactic; there has been little discussion in the nursing literature of the ethical aspects of health promotion. However, recent developments in nurse education, such as Project 2000 and the consequent changes to preregistration programmes, have resulted in increased attention to both ethics and health promotion within the curriculum. (shrink)

The development of ethics case consultation over the past 30 years, initially in North America and recently in Western Europe, has primarily taken place in the secondary or tertiary healthcare settings. The predominant model for ethics consultation, in some countries overwhelmingly so, is a hospital-based clinical ethics committee. In the United States, accreditation boards suggest the ethics committee model as a way of meeting the ethics component of the accreditation requirement for payment by Health (...) Maintenance Organizations, and in some European countries, there are legislatory requirements or government recommendations for hospitals to have clinical ethics committees. There is no corresponding pressure for primary care services to have ethics committees or ethics consultants to advise clinicians, patients, and families on the difficult ethical decisions that arise in clinical practice. (shrink)

This was designed for all instructors who teach aspects of biological evolution in their college courses.

Theological basis -- Religion and health care -- The dignity of human life -- The integrity of the human person -- Implications for health care -- Theological principles in health care ethics -- Method -- The levels and questions of ethics -- Freedom and the moral agent -- Right and wrong -- Metaethics -- Method in Catholic bioethics -- Catholic method and birth control -- The principle of double effect -- Application -- (...) Forgoing treatment, pillar one: ordinary and extraordinary means -- Forgoing treatment, pillar two: killing and allowing to die -- Forgoing treatment, pillar three: decisions by competent patients -- Forgoing treatment, pillar three: decisions for incompetent patients -- Forgoing treatment, pillar three: advance directives -- Hydration and nutrition -- Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia -- Medical futility -- Pain and pain management -- Ethics committees -- Embryonic stem cells and the beginning of human personhood -- Genetic engineering -- Allocating health care resources -- The use and misuse of the allocation argument. (shrink)

The third edition of Health Care Ethics in Canada builds on the commitment to Canadian content established in earlier editions without sacrificing breadth or rigor.

Ethics consultation has become an integral part of the fabric of U.S. health care delivery. This article summarizes the second edition of the Core Competencies for Health Care Ethics Consultation report of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. The core knowledge and skills competencies identified in the first edition of Core Competencies have been adopted by various ethics consultation services and education programs, providing evidence of their endorsement as health care (...) ethics consultation (HCEC) standards. This revised report was prompted by thinking in the field that has evolved since the original report. Patients, family members, and health care providers who encounter ethical questions or concerns that ethics consultants could help address deserve access to efficient, effective, and accountable HCEC services. All individuals providing such services should be held to the standards of competence and quality described in the revised report. (shrink)

Due to the increasing cost of health care and the diminishing resources available, priority of health care resources has become a most important political and ethical issue. What principles should guide the decisions of priorities? The Swedish Commission of Priorities in Health Care proposed in 1995 that priorities in health care should be based on a Principle of Human Dignity . Later, the recommendations of the commission were implemented in Swedish law.The question (...) I will try to answer in this article is whether a principle of human dignity is helpful when establishing priorities in health care. What implications, if any, will it have for the decisions on how to make priorities?It is often said that human life has intrinsic value and that human beings are inviolable. When applied to normative ethics, these views are the bases for a Sanctity of Life Principle and a Principle of Human Dignity , ethical standards that have a long history in the western tradition. The principles stating the intrinsic value of human life have been interpreted in different ways and there are a large number of definitions of concepts like `sanctity of life' and `human dignity' . The concept `sanctity of life' is often used by authors in a religious tradition, while `human dignity' is usually used by secular authors. Immanuel Kant, using the concept `dignity' is one example of the latter.To establish a priority is to make a choice to do one thing before something else. In health care it means in practice in some cases a choice to treat one patient first. It seems that if human life is of intrinsic value and inviolable, one should always give priority to life-saving treatment and critical care. Thus, a duty always to save human lives would follow from the PHD and saving human life would be primary in an ordering of priorities. As a consequence, one could question an allocation of health care resources to other ends than saving human lives.One objection against this application is that it leaves out of account the distinction between direct and indirect ways of saving human lives. Some minor illnesses may in the long run become grave, if they are not treated when they are just minor. Thus, to treat them at an early stage is an indirect way of saving the life of the patient. And it may also be a more cost-efficient way. The treatment at an early stage may be much easier and cheaper than at a late stage in the development of the illness.On the other hand, the objection based on the distinction between direct and indirect ways of saving human lives applies only to some of the minor illnesses. There are others, among them fractures, which in the long run do not threaten the life of the patient if not treated.The PHD has been under forceful attack in recent discussions in medical ethics. It is said to imply indefensible consequences and stands accused of being a remnant of a moral tradition no longer relevant. Does the PHD imply that saving human life is primary in an ordering of priorities? Is the principle relevant for the discussion on priorities in health care? In order to answer these questions I will examine some different views of the PHD and ways of applying the principle to decisions on priorities. I will start with the report from the Swedish Commission on Priorities in Health Care that claimed that the PHD should be the most basic principle for priorities. Than, I will examine some theological and philosophical views in support of, or questioning, the PHD. I will relate the application of these views to the moral aspects of establishing priorities in health care. Finally, I will answer the question whether the PHD really has any relevance for decisions on priorities in health care. (shrink)

This paper explores ethical concerns arising in healthcare integration. We argue that integration is necessary imperative for meeting contemporary and future healthcare challenges, a far stronger evidence base for the conditions of its effectiveness is required. In particular, given the increasing emphasis at the policy level for the entire healthcare infrastructure to become better integrated, our analysis of the ethical challenges that follow from the logic of integration itself is timely and important and has hitherto received insufficient attention. We evaluated (...) an educational intervention which aims to improve child health outcomes by making transitions between primary to secondary care more efficient, ensuring children and parents are better supported throughout. The programme provided skills for trainee paediatricians and general practitioners in co-designing integrated clinical services. The key ethical challenges of integrated care that arose from a clinical perspective are: professional identity and autonomy in an integrated working environment; the concomitant extent of professional responsibility in such an environment; and the urgent need for more evidence to be produced on which strategies for integrating at scale can be based. From our analysis we suggest a tentative way forward, viewed from a normative position broadly situated at the intersection of deontology and care ethics. We adopt this position because the primary clinical ethical issues in the context of integrated care concern: how to ensure that all duties of care to individual patients are met in a newly orientated working environment where clinical responsibility may be ambiguous; and the need to orientate care around the patient by foregrounding their autonomous preferences and ensuring good patient clinician relationships in clinical decision-making. (shrink)

The purpose of this book is to assist health care professionals in understanding some of the complex contemporary issues that they confront and to provide guidance in making decisions. These issues are described and analyzed in the context of philosophical principles and methods in language that is understandable to the professional who is unfamiliar with the study of philosophy and ethics. -from Preface.

Edited by four leading members of the new generation of medical and healthcare ethicists working in the UK, respected worldwide for their work in medical ethics, Principles of Health Care Ethics, Second Edition_is a standard resource for students, professionals, and academics wishing to understand current and future issues in healthcare ethics. With a distinguished international panel of contributors working at the leading edge of academia, this volume presents a comprehensive guide to the field, with state (...) of the art introductions to the wide range of topics in modern healthcare ethics, from consent to human rights, from utilitarianism to feminism, from the doctor-patient relationship to xenotransplantation. This volume is the Second Edition of the highly successful work edited by Professor Raanan Gillon, Emeritus Professor of Medical Ethics at Imperial College London and former editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics, the leading journal in this field. Developments from the First Edition include:_ The focus on ‘Four Principles Method’ is relaxed to cover more different methods in health care ethics. More material on new medical technologies is included, the coverage of issues on the doctor/patient relationship is expanded, and material on ethics and public health is brought together into a new section. (shrink)