Buchman Daniel Z, Ho Anita, Goldberg Daniel S
University Health Network, Bioethics Program, Joint Centre for Bioethics and Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 399 Bathurst Street, McLaughlin Block, 8th Floor, Room 443, Toronto, ON, M5S 2S8, Canada.
Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore and W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia, Block MD11, Clinical Research Centre, 10 Medical Drive, Singapore, 117597, Singapore.
J Bioeth Inq. 2017 Mar;14(1):31-42. doi: 10.1007/s11673-016-9761-x. Epub 2016 Dec 22.
Trust is central to the therapeutic relationship, but the epistemic asymmetries between the expert healthcare provider and the patient make the patient, the trustor, vulnerable to the provider, the trustee. The narratives of pain sufferers provide helpful insights into the experience of pain at the juncture of trust, expert knowledge, and the therapeutic relationship. While stories of pain sufferers having their testimonies dismissed are well documented, pain sufferers continue to experience their testimonies as being epistemically downgraded. This kind of epistemic injustice has received limited treatment in bioethics. In this paper, we examine how a climate of distrust in pain management may facilitate what Fricker calls epistemic injustice. We critically interrogate the processes through which pain sufferers are vulnerable to specific kinds of epistemic injustice, such as testimonial injustice. We also examine how healthcare institutions and practices privilege some kinds of evidence and ways of knowing while excluding certain patient testimonies from epistemic consideration. We argue that providers ought to avoid epistemic injustice in pain management by striving toward epistemic humility. Epistemic humility, as a form of epistemic justice, may be the kind disposition required to correct the harmful prejudices that may arise through testimonial exchange in chronic pain management.
信任是治疗关系的核心,但专业医疗服务提供者与患者之间的认知不对称,使得作为信任方的患者容易受到作为受托方的医疗服务提供者的伤害。疼痛患者的叙述有助于深入了解在信任、专业知识和治疗关系的交汇点上的疼痛体验。虽然有充分的文献记载疼痛患者的证词被驳回的情况,但疼痛患者仍然觉得他们的证词在认知上被贬低了。这种认知不公正现象在生物伦理学中受到的关注有限。在本文中,我们探讨了疼痛管理中不信任的氛围如何可能助长弗里克所说的认知不公正。我们批判性地审视了疼痛患者容易遭受特定类型认知不公正(如证言不公正)的过程。我们还研究了医疗机构和实践如何偏袒某些类型的证据和认知方式,同时将某些患者的证词排除在认知考虑之外。我们认为,医疗服务提供者应该通过追求认知谦逊来避免疼痛管理中的认知不公正。认知谦逊作为一种认知公正的形式,可能是纠正慢性疼痛管理中证言交流可能产生的有害偏见所需的友善态度。