Browning David J
Department of Ophthalmology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Clin Ophthalmol. 2024 Sep 6;18:2539-2544. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S475660. eCollection 2024.
To highlight gaps in the professional ethics of ophthalmology.
Perspective.
Presentation of problematic cases in ophthalmologic ethics with juxtaposition of ethical, legal, and conscientious viewpoints informed by relevant literature.
What is legal, ethical, and conscientious overlap but are not identical. Professional ethical guidelines, when they exist, are stricter than what the law requires, but are silent on several contemporary controversies. Conscientious guidelines can vary from loosest to strictest as they apply to individuals with wide variability. The relationship of ophthalmology to society changes, and ethical guidelines lag for some of the interactions.
The rules of ethics for ophthalmology need to be updated and evidence of activity and oversight made public. Failure to do so invites greater external regulation.
突出眼科职业道德方面的差距。
观点阐述。
通过呈现眼科伦理中的问题案例,并结合相关文献中的伦理、法律和良心观点进行分析。
合法、合乎伦理和凭良心行事的范畴有重叠但并不完全相同。专业伦理准则(若存在)比法律要求更为严格,但对一些当代争议问题却未作规定。良心准则因适用于差异极大的个体,其严格程度也会有所不同。眼科与社会的关系在变化,而伦理准则在某些互动方面滞后。
眼科伦理规则需要更新,且活动和监督的证据应予以公开。否则将招致更多外部监管。