Faculty for Applied Healthcare Sciences, DIT - Deggendorf Institute of Technology, Dieter-Görlitz-Platz 1, 94469, Deggendorf, Germany.
HEC Forum. 2020 Sep;32(3):211-226. doi: 10.1007/s10730-020-09396-7.
The article is dedicated to the application questions of a case study method known as casuistry. In its long tradition, it focuses on an influential variant of the early modern period and reconstructs its functionality. In the course of reading recent receptions, it is noted that some studies speak of a "casuistic revival" in moral case deliberation in health care. As a result of this revival, casuistry has been modified in such a way that it guides case discussions in practice with the help of a tripartite methodology (morphology, taxonomy, and kinetics). However, as it turns out, casuistry, a case comparison method of ethical judgement based on reasoning logic, is less suitable for moral case deliberations in direct patient care. This stems from the fact that casuistry is a detailed procedure of ethical learning beneficial to institutionalized ethics committees or similar forms of ethics consultation in health care.
本文致力于探讨案例研究方法(即决问题法)的应用问题。在其悠久的传统中,它侧重于早期现代时期的一个有影响力的变体,并对其功能进行了重建。在阅读最近的研究成果时,我们注意到一些研究称医疗保健中的道德案例审议中出现了“决问题法复兴”。由于这种复兴,决问题法已经过修改,以便通过三分体方法(形态学、分类学和动力学)在实践中指导案例讨论。然而,事实证明,决问题法作为一种基于推理逻辑的伦理判断案例比较方法,不太适合直接在患者护理中进行道德案例审议。这是因为决问题法是一种详细的伦理学习程序,有利于机构化的伦理委员会或类似形式的医疗保健伦理咨询。