Schicktanz Silke, Schweda Mark, Franzen Martina
Department of Medical Ethics and for the History of Medicine, University of Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany.
Med Health Care Philos. 2008 Mar;11(1):57-72. doi: 10.1007/s11019-007-9074-2. Epub 2007 Jul 6.
In this paper, we explore and discuss the use of the concept of being affected in biomedical decision making processes in Germany. The corresponding German term 'Betroffenheit' characterizes on the one hand a relation between a state of affairs and a person and on the other an emotional reaction that involves feelings like concern and empathy with the suffering of others. An example for the increasing relevance of being affected is the postulation of the participation of people with disabilities and chronic or acute diseases in the discourse, as partly realized in the German National Ethics Council or the Federal Joint Committee. Nevertheless, not only on the political level, the resistance against the participation of affected people is still strong; the academic debate seems to be cross-grained, too. Against this background, we explore the meaning and argumentative role of the concept of being affected as it is used by affected and lay people themselves. Our analysis is based on four focus group discussions in which lay people, patients and relatives of patients discuss their attitudes towards biomedical interventions such as organ transplantation and genetic testing. This setting allows for a comparison of how affected and non-affected people are concerned and deliberate about medical opportunities, but also of how they position themselves as being affected or non-affected with respect to (scientific) knowledge and morality. On this basis, we discuss the normative relevance of being affected for the justification of political participation.
在本文中,我们探讨并讨论了“受影响”这一概念在德国生物医学决策过程中的应用。相应的德语术语“Betroffenheit”一方面描述了一种事态与一个人之间的关系,另一方面描述了一种情感反应,这种反应涉及诸如对他人痛苦的关切和同理心等感受。“受影响”的相关性日益增加的一个例子是,残疾人以及患有慢性或急性疾病的人参与相关讨论的主张,这在德国国家伦理委员会或联邦联合委员会中部分得以实现。然而,不仅在政治层面,反对受影响者参与的阻力仍然很大;学术辩论似乎也存在分歧。在此背景下,我们探讨“受影响”这一概念在受影响者和普通民众自身使用时的意义和论证作用。我们的分析基于四次焦点小组讨论,在这些讨论中,普通民众、患者及其亲属讨论了他们对器官移植和基因检测等生物医学干预措施的态度。这种环境使得我们能够比较受影响者和未受影响者对医疗机会的关注和思考方式,也能比较他们在(科学)知识和道德方面如何将自己定位为受影响者或未受影响者。在此基础上,我们讨论“受影响”对于政治参与正当性的规范相关性。