| 1. |
- Ahlin, Jesper
(författare)
-
What Justifies Judgments of Inauthenticity?
- 2018
-
Ingår i: HEC Forum. - : Springer. - 0956-2737 .- 1572-8498.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The notion of authenticity, i.e., being “genuine,” “real,” or “true to oneself,” is sometimes held as critical to a person’s autonomy, so that inauthenticity prevents the person from making autonomous decisions or leading an autonomous life. It has been pointed out that authenticity is difficult to observe in others. Therefore, judgments of inauthenticity have been found inadequate to underpin paternalistic interventions, among other things. This article delineates what justifies judgments of inauthenticity. It is argued that for persons who wish to live according to the prevailing social and moral standards and desires that are seriously undesirable according to those standards, it is justified to judge that a desire is inauthentic to the extent that it is due to causal factors that are alien to the person and to the extent that it deviates from the person’s practical identity. The article contributes to a tradition of thinking about authenticity which is known mainly from Frankfurt and Dworkin, and bridges the gap between theoretical ideals of authenticity and real authenticity-related problems in practical biomedical settings.
|
|
| 2. |
- Fischer Grönlund, Catarina, et al.
(författare)
-
Managing Ethical Difficulties in Healthcare : Communicating in Inter-professional Clinical Ethics Support Sessions
- 2016
-
Ingår i: HEC Forum. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0956-2737 .- 1572-8498. ; 28:4, s. 321-338
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Several studies show that healthcare professionals need to communicate inter-professionally in order to manage ethical difficulties. A model of clinical ethics support (CES) inspired by Habermas' theory of discourse ethics has been developed by our research group. In this version of CES sessions healthcare professionals meet inter-professionally to communicate and reflect on ethical difficulties in a cooperative manner with the aim of reaching communicative agreement or reflective consensus. In order to understand the course of action during CES, the aim of this study was to describe the communication of value conflicts during a series of inter-professional CES sessions. Ten audio- and video-recorded CES sessions were conducted over eight months and were analyzed by using the video analysis tool Transana and qualitative content analysis. The results showed that during the CES sessions the professionals as a group moved through the following five phases: a value conflict expressed as feelings of frustration, sharing disempowerment and helplessness, the revelation of the value conflict, enhancing realistic expectations, seeing opportunities to change the situation instead of obstacles. In the course of CES, the professionals moved from an individual interpretation of the situation to a common, new understanding and then to a change in approach. An open and permissive communication climate meant that the professionals dared to expose themselves, share their feelings, face their own emotions, and eventually arrive at a mutual shared reality. The value conflict was not only revealed but also resolved.
|
|
| 3. |
- Rasoal, Dara, 1980-, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical Ethics Support for Healthcare Personnel : An Integrative Literature Review
- 2017
-
Ingår i: HEC Forum. - Dordrecht, Netherlands : Springer. - 0956-2737 .- 1572-8498. ; 29:4, s. 313-346
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- This study describes which clinical ethics approaches are available to support healthcare personnel in clinical practice in terms of their construction, functions and goals. Healthcare personnel frequently face ethically difficult situations in the course of their work and these issues cover a wide range of areas from prenatal care to end-of-life care. Although various forms of clinical ethics support have been developed, to our knowledge there is a lack of review studies describing which ethics support approaches are available, how they are constructed and their goals in supporting healthcare personnel in clinical practice. This study engages in an integrative literature review. We searched for peer-reviewed academic articles written in English between 2000 and 2016 using specific Mesh terms and manual keywords in CINAHL, MEDLINE and Psych INFO databases. In total, 54 articles worldwide described clinical ethics support approaches that include clinical ethics consultation, clinical ethics committees, moral case deliberation, ethics rounds, ethics discussion groups, and ethics reflection groups. Clinical ethics consultation and clinical ethics committees have various roles and functions in different coun-tries. They can provide healthcare personnel with advice and recommendations regarding the best course of action. Moral case deliberation, ethics rounds, ethics discussion groups and ethics reflection groups support the idea that group reflection increases insight into ethical issues. Clinical ethics support in the form of a ‘‘bot-tom-up’’ perspective might give healthcare personnel opportunities to think and reflect more than a ‘‘top-down’’ perspective. A ‘‘bottom-up’’ approach leaves the healthcare personnel with the moral responsibility for their choice of action in clinical practice, while a ‘‘top-down’’ approach risks removing such moral responsibility.
|
|
