Suppr超能文献

良知、不服从和护理标准。

Conscience, Disobedience, and Standard of Care.

出版信息

Hastings Cent Rep. 2024 Jul;54(4):10-12. doi: 10.1002/hast.4903.

Abstract

In the article "Principled Conscientious Provision: Referral Symmetry and Its Implications for Protecting Secular Conscience," Abram L. Brummett, Tanner Hafen, and Mark C. Navin reject what they call the "referral asymmetry" in U.S. conscientious objection law in medicine, which recognizes rights of conscientiously objecting physicians to withhold referrals for medical interventions but does not (yet) recognize rights of physicians to make referrals for medical interventions to which they are morally committed but to which their health care institutions are morally opposed. This commentary concentrates on a second asymmetry, namely, the relationship of a health care provider's referral or nonreferral to the medical standard of care. The commentary argues that this second asymmetry seems to require action more appropriately recognized as civil disobedience than conscientious provision of referral.

摘要

在题为“有原则的凭良心拒做:转介对称及其对保护世俗良心的意义”的文章中,Abram L. Brummett、Tanner Hafen 和 Mark C. Navin 反对他们所谓的美国医疗保健行业中凭良心拒做的“转介不对称”,这种不对称承认有良心拒做的医生有权拒绝转介医疗干预,但不承认(尚未承认)医生有权对他们在道德上承诺但他们的医疗机构在道德上反对的医疗干预进行转介。本评论主要关注第二个不对称,即医疗保健提供者的转介或不转介与医疗护理标准的关系。本评论认为,这种第二个不对称似乎需要更多地被视为公民抗命,而不是凭良心提供转介。

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