1,746 results match your criteria Cambridge Quarterly Of Healthcare Ethics[Journal]


Counting Cases of Termination of Life without Request: New Dances with Data.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):395-402

This paper explores the common argument proposed by opponents of the legalization of euthanasia that permitting ending a patient's life at their request will lead to the eventual legalization of terminating life without request. The author's examination of data does not support the conclusion that a causal connection exists between legalizing ending of life on request and an increase in the number of cases without request. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000122DOI Listing

Commentary: Whose suffering?

Authors:
Martin Buijsen

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):346-353

Marije Brouwer et al. contend that collecting treatment experiences of newborns with life-threatening conditions can support both caregivers and parents in making difficult end-of-life decisions. They illustrate the importance of that understanding by narrating the heartbreaking story of the sisters Roos and Noor, two newborns in the last stage of their lives. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000067DOI Listing

Commentary: In Search of Medical Ethics and Its Foundation with Rosamond Rhodes.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):429-436

In her thorough and thoughtful contribution to the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics titled "Medical Ethics: Common or Uncommon Morality" Rosamond Rhodes argues that contrary to American mainstream bioethics, medical ethics is not, and should not be, based on common morality, but rather, that the medical profession requires its own distinctive morality.1 She goes on to list sixteen duties that, according to her, form the core of medical ethics proper. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000171DOI Listing

Thinking About Difficulties: Using Poetry to Enhance Interpretative and Collaborative Skills in Healthcare Ethics Education.

Authors:
Amy Haddad

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):459-469

Viewing difficulty as an opportunity for learning runs counter to the common view of difficulty as a source of frustration and confusion. The aim of this article is to focus on the idea of difficulty as a stepping-off point for learning. The literature on difficulty in reading texts, and its impact on thinking and the interpretive process, serve as a foundation for the use of poetry in healthcare ethics education. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000201DOI Listing

From Death to Life: Ethical Issues in Postmortem Sperm Retrieval as a Source of New Life.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):369-374

This paper examines and critiques the ethical issues in postmortem sperm retrieval and the use of postmortem sperm to create new life. The article was occasioned by the recent request of the parents of a West Point cadet who died in a skiing accident at the Academy to retrieve and use his sperm to honor his memory and perpetuate the family name. The request occasioned national media attention. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000092DOI Listing

Commentary: Beyond Common or Uncommon Morality.

Authors:
Leslie Francis

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):426-428

In "Medical Ethics: Common or Uncommon Morality,"1 Rosamond Rhodes defends a specialist view of medical ethics, specifically the ethics of physicians. Rhodes's account is specifically about the ethics of medical professionals, rooted in what these professionals do. It would seem to follow that other healthcare professions might be subject to ethical standards that differ from those applicable to physicians, rooted in what these other professions do, but I leave this point aside for purposes of this commentary. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S096318012000016XDOI Listing

Death and Irreversibility.

Authors:
Nada Gligorov

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):334-336

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000043DOI Listing

How to Legalize Medically Assisted Death in a Free and Democratic Society.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):361-368

In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the criminal law prohibiting physician assisted death in Canada. In 2016, Parliament passed legislation to allow what it called 'medical assistance in dying (MAID).' The authors first describe the arguments the Court used to strike down the law, and then argue that MAID as legalized in Bill C-14 is based on principles that are incompatible with a free and democratic society, prohibits assistance in dying that should be permitted, and makes access to medically-assisted death unnecessarily difficult. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000080DOI Listing

Medical Ethics: Common or Uncommon Morality?

Authors:
Rosamond Rhodes

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):404-420

This paper challenges the long-standing and widely accepted view that medical ethics is nothing more than common morality applied to clinical matters. It argues against Tom Beauchamp and James Childress's four principles; Bernard Gert, K. Danner Clouser and Charles Culver's ten rules; and Albert Jonsen, Mark Siegler, and William Winslade's four topics approaches to medical ethics. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000146DOI Listing

Pediatric Brain Tumors: Narrating Suffering and End-of-Life Decisionmaking.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):338-345

When talking about decisionmaking for children with a life-threatening condition, the death of children with brain tumors deserves special attention. The last days of the lives of these children can be particularly harsh for bystanders, and raise questions about the suffering of these children themselves. In the Netherlands, these children are part of the group for whom a wide range of end-of-life decisions are discussed, and questions raised. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000055DOI Listing

Neuroscience-based Psychiatric Assessments of Criminal Responsibility: Beyond Self-Report?

Authors:
Gerben Meynen

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):446-458

Many legal systems have an insanity defense, which means that although a person has committed a crime, she is not held criminally responsible for the act. A challenge with regard to these assessments is that forensic psychiatrists have to rely to a considerable extent on the defendant's self-report. Could neuroscience be a way to make these evaluations more objective? The current value of neuroimaging in insanity assessments will be examined. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000195DOI Listing

Conceptual Barriers to Palliative Care and Enlightenment From Chuang-tze's Thoughts.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):386-394

This paper claims that palliative care (PC) is a suitable approach for offering comprehensive support to patients with life-threatening illness and unavoidable asthenia, to enhance their quality of life in aging and chronic illness. There are however some conceptual barriers to accessing that care on the Chinese Mainland: (1) Death-denying culture and society; (2) Misguidance and malpractice derived from the biomedical model; (3) Prejudice against PC and certain deviant understandings of filial piety culture. To counter these obstacles, the study introduces the philosophy of Chinese Taoist Chuang-tze to enlighten the public from ignorance and remove some illusions about death and dying; inspire people to face and accept illness and death calmly, and keep harmony and inner peace of mind to alleviate suffering, with the aim of providing wisdom and a shift of attitude toward life and death. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000110DOI Listing

Retrieving the Moral in the Ethics of Maternal-Fetal Surgery.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):480-493

Open-uterine surgery to repair spina bifida, or 'fetal surgery of open neural tube defects,' has generated questions throughout its history-and continues to do so in a variety of contexts. As clinical ethics consultants who worked (Mark J. Bliton) and trained (Virginia L. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000225DOI Listing

Commentary: Medical Ethics: A Distinctive Species of Ethics.

Authors:
Leonard M Fleck

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jul;29(3):421-425

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000158DOI Listing

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Healthcare Crisis Leadership as Ethics Communication.

Authors:
Matti Häyry

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 May 22:1-14. Epub 2020 May 22.

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000444DOI Listing

The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Month of Bioethics in Finland.

Authors:
Matti Häyry

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr 30:1-9. Epub 2020 Apr 30.

Finland's first COVID-19 infection was recorded in late January 2020. The person infected was a tourist from China in Lapland. Authorities recommended regular handwashing, coughing in one's sleeve, not touching your face, physical distancing, and home lockdown for those at risk. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000432DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7218182PMC

Why Kill the Cabin Boy?

Authors:
John Harris

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr 16:1-6. Epub 2020 Apr 16.

The task of combatting and defeating Covid-19 calls for drastic measures as well as cool heads. It also requires that we keep our nerve and our moral integrity. In the fight for survival, as individuals and as societies, we must not lose our grip on the values and the compassion that make individual and collective survival worth fighting for, or indeed worth having. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000420DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7203162PMC

Commentary: Challenges to Achieve Conceptual Clarity in the Definition of Pandemics.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):218-222

From a scientific standpoint, the world is more prepared than ever to respond to infectious disease outbreaks; paradoxically, globalization and air travel, antimicrobial resistance, the threat of bioterrorism, and newly emerging pathogens driven by ecological, socioeconomic, and environmental factors, have increased the risk of global epidemics.1,2,3 Following the 2002-2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), global efforts to build global emergency response capabilities to contain infectious disease outbreaks were put in place.4,5,6 But the recent H1N1, Ebola, and Zika global epidemics have shown unnecessary delays and insufficient coordination in response efforts. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001014DOI Listing

The Nocebo Effect and Informed Consent-Taking Autonomy Seriously.

Authors:
Scott Gelfand

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):223-235

The nocebo effect, a phenomenon whereby learning about the possible side effects of a medical treatment increases the likelihood that one will suffer these side effects, continues to challenge physicians and ethicists. If a physician fully informs her patient as to the potential side effects of a medicine that may produce nocebogenic effects, which is usually conceived of as being a requirement associated with the duty to respect autonomy, she risks increasing the likelihood that her patient will experience these side effects and therefore suffer (unnecessary) harm, a violation of the duty of nonmaleficence. If, on the other hand, she intentionally withholds side effect information in an effort to protect her patient from suffering unnecessary harm from side effects, which is consistent with the duty of nonmaleficence, she violates the duty to respect patient autonomy. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001026DOI Listing

Counter-Transference and the Clinical Ethics Encounter: What, Why, and How We Feel During Consultations.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):317-326

One of the more draining aspects of being a clinical ethicist is dealing with the emotions of patients, family members, as well as healthcare providers. Generally, by the time a clinical ethicist is called into a case, stress levels are running high, patience is low, and interpersonal communication is strained. Management of this emotional burden of clinical ethics is an underexamined aspect of the profession and academic literature. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001105DOI Listing

Lessons Learned in Developing and Testing a Methotrexate Case Study for Pharmacy Education.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):308-316

This article describes the development, implementation, and evaluation of a complex methotrexate ethics case used in teaching a Pharmacy Law and Ethics course. Qualitative analysis of student reflective writings provided useful insight into the students' experience and comfort level with the final ethics case in the course. These data demonstrate a greater student appreciation of different perspectives, the potential for conflict in communicating about such cases, and the importance of patient autonomy. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001099DOI Listing

The Cannibali That We Are: For a Bioethics of Food.

Authors:
Fabrizio Turoldo

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):268-275

Is it possible to trace the contours of a bioethical reflection on nutrition? The present study tries to do so, relying on the metaphorical and symbolic value that food often takes. Indeed, eating does not mean just getting sufficient nutrition, because through the offer and exchange of food, people recognize and welcome each other. In this sense we are all, in some way, cannibals, because in eating, we eat the other, even if the introjection of the other is only symbolic and not literal, as in the case of actual cannibals. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001051DOI Listing

Editorial: Examining the Links.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):167-173

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000963DOI Listing

The Mismarriage of Personal Responsibility and Health.

Authors:
Greg Bognar

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):196-204

This paper begins with a simple illustration of the choice between individual and population strategies in population health policy. It describes the traditional approach on which the choice is to be made on the relative merits of the two strategies in each case. It continues by identifying two factors-our knowledge of the consequences of the epidemiological transition and the prevalence of responsibility-sensitive theories of distributive justice-that may distort our moral intuitions when we deliberate about the choice of appropriate risk-management strategies in population health. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000999DOI Listing

The Traditional Definition of Pandemics, Its Moral Conflations, and Its Practical Implications: A Defense of Conceptual Clarity in Global Health Laws and Policies.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):205-217

This paper argues that the existing definition of pandemics is not nuanced enough, because it is predicated solely on the criterion of spread, rather than on the criteria of spread and severity. This definitional challenge is what I call 'the conflation problem': there is a conflation of two different realities of global health, namely global health emergencies (i.e. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001002DOI Listing

Causation, Responsibility, and Harm: How the Discursive Shift from Law and Ethics to Social Justice Sealed the Plight of Nonhuman Animals.

Authors:
Matti Häyry

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):246-267

Moral and political philosophers no longer condemn harm inflicted on nonhuman animals as self-evidently as they did when animal welfare and animal rights advocacy was at the forefront in the 1980s, and sentience, suffering, species-typical behavior, and personhood were the basic concepts of the discussion. The article shows this by comparing the determination with which societies seek responsibility for human harm to the relative indifference with which law and morality react to nonhuman harm. When harm is inflicted on humans, policies concerning negligence and duty of care and principles such as the 'but for' rule and the doctrine of double effect are easily introduced. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S096318011900104XDOI Listing

Commentary: Responsibility-Sensitive Healthcare Funding: Three Responses to Clavien and Hurst's Critique.

Authors:
Thomas Douglas

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):192-195

Christine Clavien and Samia Hurst1 (henceforth C-H) make at least three valuable contributions to the literature on responsibility and healthcare. They offer an admirably clear and workable set of criteria for determining a patient's degree of responsibility for her health condition; they deploy those criteria to cast doubt on the view that patients with lifestyle-related conditions are typically significantly responsible for their conditions; and they outline several practical difficulties that would be raised by any attempt to introduce responsibility-sensitive healthcare funding. I am sympathetic to the general thrust of their argument, share-at least tentatively-their policy conclusions, and was persuaded by much of the detail of their argument. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000987DOI Listing

The Undeserving Sick? An Evaluation of Patients' Responsibility for Their Health Condition.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):175-191

The recent increased prevalence of diseases related to unhealthy lifestyles raises difficulties for healthcare insurance systems traditionally based on the principles of risk-management, solidarity, and selective altruism: since these diseases are, to some extent, predictable and avoidable, patients seem to bear some responsibility for their condition and may not deserve full access to social medical services. Here, we investigate with objective criteria to what extent it is warranted to hold patients responsible for their illness and to sanction them accordingly. We ground our analysis on a series of minimal conditions for 'practical' and for 'moral' responsibility attribution. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000975DOI Listing

The Cannibal's Gaze: A Reflection on the Ethics of Care Starting from Salvador Dalí's Oeuvre.

Authors:
Fabrizio Turoldo

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):276-284

Starting from two paintings by Salvador Dalì (The Enigma of William Tell and Autumnal Cannibalism), the article explores Sigmund Freud and Carl Gustav Jung's idea of erotic cannibalism. The fear of being eaten is an archetype of the collective unconscious, as fairy tales clearly reveal. Following Jacques Derrida's reflections, the author suggests that the fear of being eaten is not limited to anthropophagic cultures, because there is a sort of symbolic cannibalism which has to do with the capacity for annihilation. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001063DOI Listing

Moral Compass in the Care of Patients Who Choose Aid in Dying.

Authors:
David A Bennahum

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):327-329

How can an individual's Moral Compass address the question of whether or not to help a patient to shorten and end his or her life? Moral Compass has been defined as that set of values and experiences that guides each individual's decisions and conduct in relation to others and to society. Can a robot be programmed to have a moral compass? If we were only considering rules of conduct, then perhaps yes, that would be possible. We could establish a series of rules and sanctions that a computer assisted robot could rigorously apply for any violation. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001117DOI Listing

Can Knowledge Itself Justify Harmful Research?

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):302-307

In our paper, we argue for three necessary conditions for morally permissible animal research: (1) an assertion (or expectation) of sufficient net benefit, (2) a worthwhile-life condition, and (3) a no-unnecessary-harm/qualified-basic-needs condition.1 We argue that these conditions are necessary, without taking a position on whether they are jointly sufficient. In their excellent commentary on our paper, Matthias Eggel, Carolyn Neuhaus, and Herwig Grimm (hereafter, the authors) argue for a friendly amendment to one of our three conditions. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001087DOI Listing

Commentary: Harm, Truth, and the Nocebo Effect.

Authors:
Dien Ho

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr;29(2):236-245

Nocebo effects occur when an individual experiences undesirable physiological reactions caused by doxastic states that are not a treatment's core or characteristic features.1 As Scott Gelfand2 points out, there are numerous studies that have shown that the disclosure of a treatment's side effects to a patient increases the risk of the side effects. From an ethical point of view, nocebo effects caused by the disclosures of side effects present a challenging problem. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001038DOI Listing
April 2020
0.584 Impact Factor

Commentary: On the Moral Foundations of Animal Welfare.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):54-57

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S096318011900077XDOI Listing
January 2020

A Dashboard to Improve the Alignment of Healthcare Organization Decisionmaking to Core Values and Mission Statement.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):156-162

The mission and value statements of healthcare organizations serve as the foundational philosophy that informs all aspects of the organization. The ultimate goal is seamless alignment of values to mission in a way that colors the overall life and culture of the organization. However, full alignment between healthcare organizational values and mission in a fashion that influences the daily life and culture of healthcare organizations does not always occur. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000884DOI Listing
January 2020
0.584 Impact Factor

Commentary: Trust but Verify.

Authors:
Lisa Jones-Engel

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):42-45

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000756DOI Listing
January 2020

Commentary: On The Moral Bindingness of Advance Directives.

Authors:
Stephen Latham

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):110-114

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000835DOI Listing
January 2020

Giving Children a Say without Giving Them a Choice: Obtaining Affirmation of a child's Non-dissent to Participation in Nonbeneficial Research.

Authors:
Holly Kantin

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):80-97

To what extent, if any, should minors have a say about whether they participate in research that offers them no prospect of direct benefit? This article addresses this question as it pertains to minors who cannot understand enough about what their participation would involve to make an autonomous choice, but can comprehend enough to have and express opinions about participating. The first aim is to defend David Wendler and Seema Shah's claim that minors who meet this description should not be offered a choice about whether they participate. The second aim is to show, contra Wendler and Shah, that the principle of nonmaleficence requires more with respect to giving these minors a say than merely respecting their dissent. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000811DOI Listing
January 2020

Commentary: A Belmont Report for Animals? Rights or Welfare?

Authors:
Lori Marino

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):67-70

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000793DOI Listing
January 2020

Commentary: A Belmont Report for Animals: An Idea Whose Time Has Come.

Authors:
Alka Chandna

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):46-53

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000768DOI Listing
January 2020

Reevaluating Benefits in the Moral Justification of Animal Research: A Comment on "Necessary Conditions for Morally Responsible Animal Research".

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):131-143

In a recent paper in Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics on the necessary conditions for morally responsible animal research David DeGrazia and Jeff Sebo claim that the key requirements for morally responsible animal research are (1) an assertion of sufficient net benefit, (2) a worthwhile-life condition, and (3) a no-unnecessary-harm condition. With regards to the assertion (or expectation) of sufficient net benefit (ASNB), the authors claim that morally responsible research offers unique benefits to humans that outweigh the costs and harms to humans and animals. In this commentary we will raise epistemic, practical, and ethical challenges to DeGrazia and Sebo's emphasis on benefits in the prospective assessment of research studies involving animals. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000860DOI Listing
January 2020

O Tempora! O Mores! Boni Mores .

Authors:
Jonathan Brown

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):144-155

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000872DOI Listing
January 2020

Is Human Enhancement in Space a Moral Duty? Missions to Mars, Advanced AI and Genome Editing in Space.

Authors:
Konrad Szocik

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):122-130

Any space program involving long-term human missions will have to cope with serious risks to human health and life. Because currently available countermeasures are insufficient in the long term, there is a need for new, more radical solutions. One possibility is a program of human enhancement for future deep space mission astronauts. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000859DOI Listing
January 2020

The Ethics of Medical AI and the Physician-Patient Relationship.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):115-121

This article considers recent ethical topics relating to medical AI. After a general discussion of recent medical AI innovations, and a more analytic look at related ethical issues such as data privacy, physician dependency on poorly understood AI helpware, bias in data used to create algorithms post-GDPR, and changes to the patient-physician relationship, the article examines the issue of so-called robot doctors. Whereas the so-called democratization of healthcare due to health wearables and increased access to medical information might suggest a positive shift in the patient-physician relationship, the physician's 'need to care' might be irreplaceable, and robot healthcare workers ('robot carers') might be seen as contributing to dehumanized healthcare practices. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000847DOI Listing
January 2020

Advance Healthcare Directives: Binding or Informational Value?

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Jan;29(1):98-109

Advance directives entail a refusal expressed by a still-healthy patient. Three consequences stem from that fact: (a) advance refusal is unspecific, since it is impossible to predict what the patient's conditions and the risk-benefit ratio may be in the foreseeable future; (b) those decisions cannot be as well informed as those formulated while the disease is in progress; (c) while both current consent and refusal can be revoked as the disease unfolds, until the treatment starts out, advance directives become effective when the patient becomes incapable or unconscious; such decisions can therefore not be revoked at any stage of the disease. Therefore, advance directives are binding for doctors only at the stage of advance treatment planning, i. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119000823DOI Listing
January 2020

The Rooibos Benefit Sharing Agreement-Breaking New Ground with Respect, Honesty, Fairness, and Care.

Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2020 Apr 5;29(2):285-301. Epub 2019 Nov 5.

The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its 2010 Nagoya Protocol brought about a breakthrough in global policy making. They combined a concern for the environment with a commitment to resolving longstanding human injustices regarding access to, and use of biological resources. In particular, the traditional knowledge of indigenous communities was no longer going to be exploited without fair benefit sharing. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001075DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7065993PMC