Suppr超能文献

会诊联络精神病学中常见伦理问题的基本决策方法。

A basic decision-making approach to common ethical issues in consultation-liaison psychiatry.

作者信息

Wright Mark T, Roberts Laura Weiss

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Road, Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA.

出版信息

Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2009 Jun;32(2):315-28. doi: 10.1016/j.psc.2009.03.001.

Abstract

Ethical dilemmas are found throughout the daily work of C-L psychiatrists. Unfortunately, most psychiatrists have no more training in ethics than their nonpsychiatric colleagues. Psychiatric consults spurred by ethical dilemmas can provoke anxiety in psychiatrists and leave anxious colleagues without the clear recommendations they seek. C-L psychiatrists, and probably all psychiatrists, need more training in clinical ethics. C-L psychiatrists do not need to become clinical ethicists, but competence in handling the ethical issues most commonly seen in C-L work is needed. The 2008 ABPN guidelines for specialists in psychosomatic medicine mention specific ethics topics important in C-L work, and ways of attaining competence in these areas have been discussed in the C-L literature. The four cases discussed here illustrate the high level of complexity often seen in situations in which ethical dilemmas arise in C-L psychiatry. Given the sometimes furious pace of hospital work, it can be easy for C-L psychiatrists to be seduced by the idea of the quick, focused consult that simply responds to a simple question with a simple answer. Because cases involving ethical dilemmas often involve multiple stakeholders, each with his or her own set of concerns, a brief consult focused only on the patient often leads to errors of omission. A wider approach, such as that suggested by the Four Topics Method, is needed to successfully negotiate ethical dilemmas. Busy C-L psychiatry services may struggle at first to find the time to do the type of global evaluations discussed here, but increasing familiarity with approaches such as the Four Topics Method should lead to quicker ways of gathering and processing the needed information.

摘要

伦理困境在临床-法律精神病医生的日常工作中随处可见。不幸的是,大多数精神病医生接受的伦理培训并不比他们非精神病学领域的同事多。由伦理困境引发的精神科会诊可能会使精神病医生感到焦虑,还会让焦虑的同事得不到他们所寻求的明确建议。临床-法律精神病医生,可能所有精神病医生都需要接受更多临床伦理学方面的培训。临床-法律精神病医生无需成为临床伦理学家,但需要具备处理临床-法律工作中最常见伦理问题的能力。2008年美国精神病学与神经学委员会(ABPN)针对身心医学专家的指南提到了临床-法律工作中重要的特定伦理主题,并且临床-法律领域的文献中也讨论了在这些领域获得能力的方法。这里讨论的四个案例说明了临床-法律精神病学中出现伦理困境的情况往往具有高度复杂性。鉴于医院工作有时节奏极快,临床-法律精神病医生很容易被快速、针对性强的会诊这一想法所吸引,即简单地用一个简单答案回应一个简单问题。由于涉及伦理困境的案例通常涉及多个利益相关者,每个利益相关者都有自己的一系列关注点,仅专注于患者的简短会诊往往会导致遗漏错误。需要一种更广泛的方法,比如四主题法所建议的方法,来成功应对伦理困境。繁忙的临床-法律精神病学服务部门起初可能难以抽出时间进行此处讨论的那种全面评估,但对四主题法等方法越来越熟悉应该会带来收集和处理所需信息的更快方式。

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