SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Utökad sökning

id:"swepub:oai:gup.ub.gu.se/239944"
 

Sökning: id:"swepub:oai:gup.ub.gu.se/239944" > Individual responsi...

Individual responsibility as ground for priority setting in shared decision-making

Sandman, Lars (författare)
Linköpings universitet,Avdelningen för hälso- och sjukvårdsanalys,Medicinska fakulteten,University of Boras, Sweden,Prioriteringscentrum
Gustavsson, Erik (författare)
Linköpings universitet,Avdelningen för kulturvetenskaper, KVA,Filosofiska fakulteten
Munthe, Christian, 1962 (författare)
Gothenburg University,Göteborgs universitet,Institutionen för filosofi, lingvistik och vetenskapsteori,Centrum för etik, juridik och mental hälsa,Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science,Centre for Ethics, Law, and Mental Health,University of Gothenburg, Sweden
 (creator_code:org_t)
2016-08-05
2016
Engelska.
Ingår i: Journal of Medical Ethics. - : BMJ. - 0306-6800 .- 1473-4257. ; 42:10, s. 653-8
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
Abstract Ämnesord
Stäng  
  • Introduction Given healthcare resource constraints, voices are being raised to hold patients responsible for their health choices. In parallel, there is a growing trend towards shared decision-making, aiming to empower patients and give them more control over healthcare decisions. More power and control over decisions is usually taken to mean more responsibility for them. The trend of shared decision-making would therefore seem to strengthen the case for invoking individual responsibility in the healthcare priority setting. Objective To analyse whether the implementation of shared decision-making would strengthen the argument for invoking individual responsibility in the healthcare priority setting using normative analysis. Results and conclusions Shared decision-making does not constitute an independent argument in favour of employing individual responsibility since these notions rest on different underlying values. However, if a health system employs shared decision-making, individual responsibility may be used to limit resource implications of accommodating patient preferences outside professional standards and goals. If a healthcare system employs individual responsibility, high level dynamic shared decision-making implying a joint deliberation resulting in a decision where both parties are willing to revise initial standpoints may disarm common objections to the applicability of individual responsibility by virtue of making patients more likely to exercise adequate control of their own actions. However, if communication strategies applied in the shared decision-making are misaligned to the patient's initial capacities, arguments against individual responsibility might, on the other hand, gain strength.

Ämnesord

MEDICIN OCH HÄLSOVETENSKAP  -- Hälsovetenskap -- Medicinsk etik (hsv//swe)
MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES  -- Health Sciences -- Medical Ethics (hsv//eng)
MEDICIN OCH HÄLSOVETENSKAP  -- Hälsovetenskap -- Hälso- och sjukvårdsorganisation, hälsopolitik och hälsoekonomi (hsv//swe)
MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES  -- Health Sciences -- Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy (hsv//eng)
HUMANIORA  -- Filosofi, etik och religion -- Filosofi (hsv//swe)
HUMANITIES  -- Philosophy, Ethics and Religion -- Philosophy (hsv//eng)
HUMANIORA  -- Filosofi, etik och religion -- Etik (hsv//swe)
HUMANITIES  -- Philosophy, Ethics and Religion -- Ethics (hsv//eng)

Nyckelord

Rationing
Person centred care
Justice
Luck egalitarianism
Bioethics
Autonomy; Decision-making; Resource Allocation

Publikations- och innehållstyp

ref (ämneskategori)
art (ämneskategori)

Hitta via bibliotek

Till lärosätets databas

Sök utanför SwePub

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy