SEARCH · Search PubMed
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Respect is a central concept in nursing care but is not well defined. Lack of respect for patients dehumanises them and may contribute to abuse and ill treatment. Transcultural care should be based on an understanding of the concept of respect which is shared by all concerned.
In the expanding repertoire of practices designed to increase the supply of organs for transplantation, non-heart-beating cadaver organ donation has generated an ongoing debate in the literature. The continuing stream of articles is disquieting in part because it documents a troubling "trial-and-error ethics" approach to the formulation of organ procurement policy, and because it raises serious questions about the reasons that the development of this policy is being mediated by published communication. In the light of concerns about the implicit support and credibility that professional publications give to organ procurement policies, restraint in publishing articles about non-heart-beating organ donation as well as in devising such policies is strongly advocated.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The author discusses the ways in which she finds the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center protocol for procuring organs from "non-heart-beating cadaver donors" medically and morally questionable and irreverent. She also identifies some of the factors that contributed to the composition of this troubling protocol, and to its institutional approval.
This paper discusses the morality of patenting human genes and genetic technologies. After examining arguments on different sides of the issue, the paper concludes that there are, at present, no compelling reasons to prohibit the extension of current patent laws to the realm of human genetics. However, since advances in genetics are likely to have profound social implications, the most prudent course of action demands a continual reexamination of genetics laws and policies in light of ongoing developments in science and technology.
The first of two articles analyzing the justifiability of international bioethical codes and of cross-cultural moral judgments reviews "moral fundamentalism," the theory that cross-cultural moral judgments and international bioethical codes are justified by certain "basic" or "fundamental" moral priniciples that are universally accepted in all cultures and eras. Initially propounded by the judges at the 1947 Nuremberg Tribunal, moral fundamentalism has become the received justification of international bioethics, and of cross-temporal and cross-cultural moral judgments. Yet today we are said to live in a multicultural and postmodern world. This article assesses the challenges that multiculturalism and postmodernism pose to fundamentalism and concludes that these challenges render the position philosophically untenable, thereby undermining the received conception of the foundations of international bioethics. The second article, which follows, offers an alternative model -- a model of negotiated moral order -- as a viable justification for international bioethics and for transcultural and transtemporal moral judgments.
The transplantation of adult human neural stem cells into prenatal non-humans offers an avenue for studying human neural cell development without direct use of human embryos. However, such experiments raise significant ethical concerns about mixing human and nonhuman materials in ways that could result in the development of human-nonhuman chimeras. This paper examines four arguments against such research, the moral taboo, species integrity, "unnaturalness," and human dignity arguments, and finds the last plausible. It argues that the transfer of human brain or retinal stem cells to nonhuman embryos would not result in the development of human-nonhuman chimeras that denigrate human dignity, provided such stem cells are dissociated. The article provides guidelines that set ethical boundaries for conducting such research that are consonant with the requirements of human dignity.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
A pronounced disjunction characterizes symbolic constructions of the cadaveric donor body in the United States, where procurement professionals and surviving donor kin vie with one another in their desires to honor this unusual category of the dead. Of special concern is the medicalized commodification of donor bodies, a process that shapes both their social worth and emotional value. Among professionals, metaphorical thinking is key: death and body fragmentation are cloaked in ecological imagery that stresses renewal and rebirth. Such objectification also obscures the origins of transplantable organs, renders individual donors anonymous, and silences kin who mourn their dead. In response, donor kin have grown increasingly assertive, generating alternative public mortuary forms that exclude professional mediators. In so doing, they challenge the medical assumption that anonymity is central to transplantation's continued success. Through donor quilts and Web cemeteries, they proclaim the personal identities of donors who, at times, may speak beyond the grave, offering critiques of donation as socio-medical process in the United States.
The current conception of Alzheimer's disease emerged in the 1970s and achieved wide acceptance and popularization because it effectively served political-economic interests, solved pragmatic, clinical, and psychological problems, and met philosophical and ethical concerns. But the very success of this widespread acceptance and popularization has produced a troubling dilemma regarding the subjectivity of the person diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease. A "loss of self" is implicit in the current Alzheimer's construct, and it has been argued that, consequently, the subjective experience of being and becoming old has become increasingly distressing. It has been further suggested that a response to this unintended assault on the self can be seen in the now burgeoning literature offering diverse representations of and debates about the "self" in Alzheimer's. What appears to be at stake in these competing voices is our very notion of what comprises the self and what constitutes subjective experience. Finally, one can speculate why, as a culture, we tell these stories about aging: it could be that, as a society as well as a community of gerontological thinkers and practitioners, our struggle with the nature of the self-in-Alzheimer's reflects our struggle to grapple with what it will be like, and what it will mean, to be and become old.
Its aim is to identify awareness of the types of non-care (lack of care)/violence that occur at hospital units. The methodology is qualitative and we have interviewed 29 clients. We have established four main categories: lack of attention, disrespect, discomfort, and irresponsibility. The results indicate that the lack of care/violence is a Power Problem related to disrespect, prejudice and/or discrimination due to a person's social/sexual condition. It is characterized by rudeness, impoliteness, arrogance, sexual harassment, contempt, and indifference on the part of healthcare professionals. The lack of care/ violence, as an Asymmetric Problem, is characterized by a behavioral attitude of power and by the lack of a horizontal dialogic communication. Lack of attention, interest and will, and discomfort have been reported. We concluded that the lack of care/violence practices occur in the everyday of the interrelations of the care-taking process between client and health professionals.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
When we die, it is only very rarely that we do so without days, weeks, or months of illness in which the suffering may be very great, sometimes from pain, often from breathlessness, impairment of consciousness, depression, anxiety, vomiting, bedsores, and incontinence. If we were able to choose our own time to die, there would be no need to suffer any of this. There should be a "right to die". It should be ethically and legally possible for the doctor attending a terminally ill patient, who asks him for help to take his own life, to put the means within his reach.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.