Suppr超能文献

当道德在人难以存续之地留存。

When Ethics Survive Where People Do Not.

作者信息

Hussein Ghaiath M A

机构信息

Research Directorate, Federal Ministry of Health , Sudan.

出版信息

Public Health Ethics. 2010 Apr;3(1):72-77. doi: 10.1093/phe/phq003. Epub 2010 Mar 18.

Abstract

The provision of health care service in resource-poor settings is associated with a broad set of ethical issues. Devakumar's case discusses the ethical issues related to the inability to treat in a cholera clinic patients who do not have cholera. This paper gives a closer look on the context in which Devakumar's case took place. It also analyses the potential local and organizational factors that gives rise to ethical dilemmas and aggravate them. It also proposes a framework to help in the proactive handling of the factors that leads to ethical dilemmas and resolving the ethical issues as they appear. It adopts the four principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice as universal and prima facie principles, but with the inclusion of a local understanding of what of each of these principles means. It is based on a collaborative approach that involves the beneficiaries and other partners in the field to help share information and resources, as well as adopting the provision of a wider service to the whole community. This is done by asking three basic questions: (a) who are the relevant stakeholders? (b) what ought to be the ethical principles in place? and (c) how should we take, implement and follow the decision about service provision?

摘要

在资源匮乏地区提供医疗保健服务会涉及一系列广泛的伦理问题。德瓦库马尔的案例讨论了与霍乱诊所无法治疗非霍乱患者相关的伦理问题。本文深入探讨了德瓦库马尔案例发生的背景。它还分析了导致伦理困境并使其恶化的潜在当地和组织因素。它还提出了一个框架,以帮助积极应对导致伦理困境的因素,并在伦理问题出现时加以解决。它采用自主、行善、不伤害和公正这四项原则作为普遍且初步的原则,但纳入了对这些原则各自含义的当地理解。它基于一种协作方法,让受益者和该领域的其他伙伴参与进来,以帮助共享信息和资源,并为整个社区提供更广泛的服务。这通过提出三个基本问题来实现:(a) 相关利益攸关方是谁?(b) 应该适用哪些伦理原则?以及 (c) 我们应如何做出、实施和遵循关于服务提供的决定?

相似文献

1
When Ethics Survive Where People Do Not.
Public Health Ethics. 2010 Apr;3(1):72-77. doi: 10.1093/phe/phq003. Epub 2010 Mar 18.
2
Medical ethics and ethical dilemmas.
Niger J Med. 2009 Jan-Mar;18(1):8-16.
4
Medical ethics: four principles plus attention to scope.
BMJ. 1994 Jul 16;309(6948):184-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6948.184.
6
When four principles are too many: a commentary.
J Med Ethics. 2012 Apr;38(4):197-8. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100385.
7
Ethical issues and Huntington's disease.
S Afr Med J. 2013 Oct 11;103(12 Suppl 1):1023-6. doi: 10.7196/samj.7146.
8
9
[Ethics in anorexia nervosa: autonomy, beneficence or responsibility?].
Rev Med Chil. 2008 May;136(5):659-65. Epub 2008 Jul 30.
10
The bioethical principles and Confucius' moral philosophy.
J Med Ethics. 2005 Mar;31(3):159-63. doi: 10.1136/jme.2002.002113.

引用本文的文献

1
Ethical dilemmas in disaster medicine.
Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2012 Oct;14(10):602-12. Epub 2012 Oct 30.

本文引用的文献

1
Democracy: the forgotten challenge for bioethics in the developing countries.
BMC Med Ethics. 2009 May 22;10:3. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-10-3.
2
In defence of moral imperialism: four equal and universal prima facie principles.
J Med Ethics. 2006 Apr;32(4):200-4. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.012591.
4
An ethics framework for public health.
Am J Public Health. 2001 Nov;91(11):1776-82. doi: 10.2105/ajph.91.11.1776.

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