Suppr超能文献

痴呆症和自闭症患者组织中的认知不公正:一项实证分析。

Epistemic injustice in dementia and autism patient organizations: An empirical analysis.

作者信息

Jongsma Karin, Spaeth Elisabeth, Schicktanz Silke

机构信息

a Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medical Center Göttingen.

出版信息

AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017 Oct-Dec;8(4):221-233. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2017.1402833. Epub 2017 Dec 5.

Abstract

Patient organizations (POs) represent patient collectives in health care policy. The inclusion of people with a 'neuro-psychiatric' condition poses a particular challenge for the organizational processes and political representation of such collectives. In recent years, new POs (POs of) have been established in the field of autism spectrum disorder and dementia that advocate a different agenda and have a different organizational structure than traditional POs (POs for). The divide between these two types of POs indicates a different standpoint with regard to who should be included on an organizational level, which voices are accepted and who should represent these voices on the political level. The inclusion and exclusion of voices needs to be normatively justified in order to be regarded legitimate representation of such a collective. With the help of Miranda Fricker's theory of epistemic injustice, we scrutinize whether and, if so, which types of epistemic injustices (wrongdoings to a person as a knower) can be found within POs' practices and the political field in which they operate, by analyzing 37 interviews with PO representatives, their members and policy makers. Our in-depth analysis indicates that persistent stereotypes hamper the inclusion of affected members both within POs and on the health political level. Being affected causes distrust in having the 'capacity to know' in a two-fold way; it is assumed that those who can represent themselves are "not affected enough" to present valuable insights into the condition and those who have difficulties to express themselves due to their condition are excluded because of their affectedness. We conclude that our analysis of the epistemic practices of POs serves as a good starting point to address these shortcomings from a theoretical and practical perspective and offers a valuable starting point for bioethics to understand unjust structures in the health political context.

摘要

患者组织(POs)在医疗保健政策中代表患者群体。将患有“神经精神”疾病的人纳入其中,对这类群体的组织流程和政治代表性构成了特殊挑战。近年来,在自闭症谱系障碍和痴呆症领域成立了新的患者组织(POs of),它们倡导的议程与传统患者组织(POs for)不同,组织结构也不同。这两种类型的患者组织之间的分歧表明,在组织层面谁应被纳入、哪些声音被接受以及在政治层面谁应代表这些声音方面存在不同立场。为了被视为这类群体的合法代表,声音的纳入和排除需要有规范性的正当理由。借助米兰达·弗里克的认知不公正理论,我们通过分析对患者组织代表、其成员和政策制定者的37次访谈,审视在患者组织的实践及其运作的政治领域中是否存在以及存在哪些类型的认知不公正(对作为认知者的人的不当行为)。我们的深入分析表明,持续存在的刻板印象阻碍了受影响成员在患者组织内部和健康政治层面的纳入。受到影响以两种方式导致对“认知能力”的不信任;一方面,人们认为能够自我代表的人“受影响不够”,无法对病情提出有价值的见解,而另一方面,那些因病情难以表达自己的人则因其受影响而被排除在外。我们得出结论,我们对患者组织认知实践的分析是从理论和实践角度解决这些缺陷的良好起点,为生物伦理学理解健康政治背景下的不公正结构提供了有价值的起点。

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