Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Bioethical Issues”

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.

At least 1,243 records · Page 69Linked to original sources
PubMed1991

A medical ethics issues survey of residents in five pediatric training programs.

Few pediatric training programs offer formal instruction or have ethics consultants to assist residents with ethical dilemmas. Moreover, even if such assistance were available, it is not clear that educators have an adequate understanding of (1) the range and frequency of possible ethical dilemmas residents may encounter, (2) residents' most troublesome concerns, (3) their use of resources to resolve issues, and (4) their own ethics belief systems. A sample of convenience (51 residents) at five midsouth residency programs was queried during 25-minute open-ended interviews to answer ethical questions; there were no refusals to participate. The "most troublesome" cases cited by the residents were related to life-and-death issues (withholding and withdrawing life support), child abuse and neglect cases, and disputes regarding patient care that arise between services. Two thirds of those surveyed indicated that they are still somewhat troubled by these difficult ethical problems. Surprisingly, residents stated that they relied on their peers more often than their attending physicians for effective assistance in resolving their most troublesome dilemmas. We support continuing education and research efforts to help residents and educators feel "more comfortable" in resolving ethical dilemmas.

Attitude↗
PubMed2005

Consequentialism, complacency, and slippery slope arguments.

The standard problem with many slippery slope arguments is that they fail to provide us with the necessary evidence to warrant our believing that the significantly morally worse circumstances they predict will in fact come about. As such these arguments have widely been criticised as 'scare-mongering'. Consequentialists have traditionally been at the forefront of such criticisms, demanding that we get serious about guiding our prescriptions for right action by a comprehensive appreciation of the empirical facts. This is not surprising, since consequentialism has traditionally been committed to the idea that right action be driven by empirical realities, and this hard-headed approach has been an especially notable feature of Australian consequentialism. But this apparent empirical hard-headedness is very selective. While consequentialists have understood their moral outlook and commitments as guided by a partnership with empirical science - most explicitly in their replies to the arguments of their detractors - some consequentialists have been remarkably complacent about providing empirical support for their own prescriptions. Our key example here is the consequentialist claim that our current practises of partiality in fact maximise the good, impartially conceived. This claim has invariably been made without compelling support for the large empirical claims upon which it rests, and so, like the speculative empirical hand-waving of weak slippery slope arguments, it seems similarly to be undermined. While these arguments have presented us with 'wishful thinking' rather than 'scare-mongering', we argue in this paper that their complacency in meeting the relevant empirical justificatory burden remains much the same.

Australia↗
PubMedDate not supplied

INSERM sets up forum.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1995

"Help must first come from the divine:" a response to Fr. George Eber's claim of the so-called incommensurability of Orthodox and non-Orthodox Christian bioethics.

Orthodox bioethics is distinctive in how it reflects on issues in bioethics. This distinctiveness is found in the relationship of spirituality and liturgy to ethics. Eber's essay, however, treats the distinctiveness as absolute uniqueness. In so focusing on the incommensurability of Orthodox bioethics Eber fails to tell his reader what Orthodox bioethics is about. Furthermore, his description of Western Christian ethics is seriously inaccurate.

Attitude to Death↗
PubMed1985

The emergence of bioethics in social work.

Ethical issues in health care, or bioethics, are not new to social work, but the maturation of the profession no less than scarce resources and advances in technology are focusing increased attention on social workers' responses to complex moral questions. A review of the history and scope of these issues provides a framework for addressing them.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed1994

How medical students think about ethical issues.

BACKGROUND: Although bioethics has become an established part of medical school curricula, relatively little is known about how students apply didactic material to clinical problem-solving situations. METHOD: Each of 92 second-year students (54 men and 38 women) at the University of California, Irvine, College of Medicine in 1991-92 wrote a paper identifying and attempting to resolve a clinical ethical dilemma of his or her choice. The papers were then coded for content, use of ethical theories and principles, degree of resolution, and level of personal orientation (i.e., evidence of personal involvement in the dilemmas). Data were analyzed by student sex and age, using chi-square tests of significance and correlational analysis. RESULTS: The students had no difficulty in identifying a range of ethical dilemma. Most students appeared to have understood and become familiar with the major ethical theories and principles currently in use, and to have employed them correctly. A majority of the students were able to successfully resolve their ethical dilemmas. Differences between the men and the women students were found regarding choice of topic, ethical principles used (p = .03), and level of personal orientation (p < .01). CONCLUSION: The women tended to be interested in issues involving broad social perspectives; to favor arguments emphasizing the rights of patients and families; and to incorporate personal responses, as well as abstract theories, in their assays. The men tended to be interested in issues involving personal control, authority, and responsibility; to advocate utilitarian, cost-containment thinking, and to rely exclusively on abstract, logical arguments. Further research should determine whether these differences can be identified in actual clinical decision making, and whether the differences have implications for the nature or quality of clinical decisions.

Attitude↗