Barth Jonas
Faculty for Education and Social Sciences, Institute for Social Sciences, University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
SOCIUM - Research Center on Inequality and Social Policy, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
Front Psychiatry. 2024 Dec 12;15:1485319. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1485319. eCollection 2024.
Uncommon behaviours such as aggression, apathy or restlessness are described as challenging behaviours in dementia care. On the one hand, this concept describes a practical problem faced by care staff and, at the same time, defines normatively how care staff should deal with this problem. A frequent benchmark here is the dignity of the person in need of care, which caregivers should also respect in the case of challenging behaviour. However, little is known about the normative standards that are effective in practice in everyday care when dealing with challenging behaviour. Researching these can provide information on which standards are actually applied and encourage reflection on which standards should be applied. In view of the fact that challenging behaviour can also be associated with aggression and/or violence in particular, an ethically significant question arises as to what effects the practical handling of such behaviour has on the extent of the willingness to use violence. The aim of this article is therefore to present empirical findings from an ethnographic study that focuses on the interpretation and practical handling of aggressive behaviour of care recipients by the nursing staff. In essence, it will be shown that a professional approach to challenging behaviour helps to prevent people with dementia in need of care from committing violent acts. If this finding is analysed in terms of its ethical implications, the conclusion suggests itself that the exclusion of the possibility of using violence is to be welcomed, since the exercise of violence makes respect for the dignity of another person, if not impossible, at least more difficult. However, it is questionable whether, under such conditions, the renunciation of violence can still be attributed the freedom required to qualify it as ethically good behaviour.
诸如攻击行为、冷漠或烦躁不安等不常见行为在痴呆症护理中被描述为具有挑战性的行为。一方面,这一概念描述了护理人员面临的实际问题,同时从规范层面界定了护理人员应如何应对这一问题。这里一个常见的基准是需要护理者的尊严,护理人员在面对具有挑战性的行为时也应予以尊重。然而,对于在日常护理实践中处理具有挑战性的行为时有效的规范标准,我们却知之甚少。对这些标准进行研究可以提供关于实际应用了哪些标准的信息,并促使人们思考应该应用哪些标准。鉴于具有挑战性的行为尤其可能与攻击和/或暴力相关,就这种行为的实际处理对暴力倾向程度有何影响这一问题,便产生了一个在伦理上具有重要意义的问题。因此,本文的目的是展示一项人种志研究的实证结果,该研究聚焦于护理人员对护理对象攻击行为的解读及实际处理方式。本质上,研究将表明,以专业方式处理具有挑战性的行为有助于防止需要护理的痴呆症患者实施暴力行为。如果从其伦理意义的角度分析这一发现,自然而然会得出这样的结论:排除使用暴力的可能性是值得欢迎的,因为实施暴力会使尊重他人尊严变得即便不是不可能,至少也更加困难。然而,在这种情况下,放弃暴力是否仍可被视为具备被界定为符合伦理的良好行为所需的自由,这是值得怀疑的。