Suppr超能文献

伦理、大流行与治疗义务。

Ethics, pandemics, and the duty to treat.

作者信息

Malm Heidi, May Thomas, Francis Leslie P, Omer Saad B, Salmon Daniel A, Hood Robert

机构信息

Department of Philosophy, Loyola University Chicago, 6525 N. Sheridan Road, Chicago, IL 60626, USA.

出版信息

Am J Bioeth. 2008 Aug;8(8):4-19. doi: 10.1080/15265160802317974.

Abstract

Numerous grounds have been offered for the view that healthcare workers have a duty to treat, including expressed consent, implied consent, special training, reciprocity (also called the social contract view), and professional oaths and codes. Quite often, however, these grounds are simply asserted without being adequately defended or without the defenses being critically evaluated. This essay aims to help remedy that problem by providing a critical examination of the strengths and weaknesses of each of these five grounds for asserting that healthcare workers have a duty to treat, especially as that duty would arise in the context of an infectious disease pandemic. Ultimately, it argues that none of the defenses is currently sufficient to ground the kind of duty that would be needed in a pandemic. It concludes by sketching some practical recommendations in that regard.

摘要

对于医护人员有治疗义务这一观点,人们提出了诸多依据,包括明示同意、默示同意、特殊培训、互惠(也称为社会契约观点)以及职业誓言和准则。然而,这些依据常常只是被简单断言,没有得到充分辩护,或者这些辩护没有得到批判性评估。本文旨在通过对主张医护人员有治疗义务的这五种依据各自的优缺点进行批判性审视来帮助解决这一问题,尤其是在传染病大流行的背景下该义务会如何产生。最终,本文认为目前没有任何一种辩护足以确立大流行情况下所需的那种义务。文章最后勾勒了这方面的一些实际建议。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验