Cargando…

Living bioethics, clinical ethics committees and children's consent to heart surgery

This discussion paper considers how seldom recognised theories influence clinical ethics committees. A companion paper examined four major theories in social science: positivism, interpretivism, critical theory and functionalism, which can encourage legalistic ethics theories or practical living bio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alderson, Priscilla, Bowman, Deborah, Brierley, Joe, J. Elliott, Martin, Kazmi, Romana, Mendizabal-Espinosa, Rosa, Montgomery, Jonathan, Sutcliffe, Katy, Wellesley, Hugo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9361409/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35967459
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14777509211034145
_version_ 1784764526234697728
author Alderson, Priscilla
Bowman, Deborah
Brierley, Joe
J. Elliott, Martin
Kazmi, Romana
Mendizabal-Espinosa, Rosa
Montgomery, Jonathan
Sutcliffe, Katy
Wellesley, Hugo
author_facet Alderson, Priscilla
Bowman, Deborah
Brierley, Joe
J. Elliott, Martin
Kazmi, Romana
Mendizabal-Espinosa, Rosa
Montgomery, Jonathan
Sutcliffe, Katy
Wellesley, Hugo
author_sort Alderson, Priscilla
collection PubMed
description This discussion paper considers how seldom recognised theories influence clinical ethics committees. A companion paper examined four major theories in social science: positivism, interpretivism, critical theory and functionalism, which can encourage legalistic ethics theories or practical living bioethics, which aims for theory–practice congruence. This paper develops the legalistic or living bioethics themes by relating the four theories to clinical ethics committee members’ reported aims and practices and approaches towards efficiency, power, intimidation, justice, equality and children’s interests and rights. Different approaches to framing ethical questions are also considered. Being aware of the four theories’ influence can help when seeking to understand and possibly change clinical ethics committee routines. The paper is not a research report but is informed by a recent study in two London paediatric cardiac units. Forty-five practitioners and related experts were interviewed, including eight members of ethics committees, about the work of informing, preparing and supporting families during the extended process of consent to children’s elective heart surgery. The mosaic of multidisciplinary teamwork is reported in a series of papers about each profession, including this one on bioethics and law and clinical ethics committees’ influence on clinical practice. The qualitative social research was funded by the British Heart Foundation, in order that more may be known about the perioperative views and needs of all concerned. Questions included how disputes can be avoided, how high ethical standards and respectful cooperation between staff and families can be encouraged, and how minors’ consent or refusal may be respected, with the support of clinical ethics committees.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9361409
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93614092022-08-10 Living bioethics, clinical ethics committees and children's consent to heart surgery Alderson, Priscilla Bowman, Deborah Brierley, Joe J. Elliott, Martin Kazmi, Romana Mendizabal-Espinosa, Rosa Montgomery, Jonathan Sutcliffe, Katy Wellesley, Hugo Clin Ethics Empirical Ethics This discussion paper considers how seldom recognised theories influence clinical ethics committees. A companion paper examined four major theories in social science: positivism, interpretivism, critical theory and functionalism, which can encourage legalistic ethics theories or practical living bioethics, which aims for theory–practice congruence. This paper develops the legalistic or living bioethics themes by relating the four theories to clinical ethics committee members’ reported aims and practices and approaches towards efficiency, power, intimidation, justice, equality and children’s interests and rights. Different approaches to framing ethical questions are also considered. Being aware of the four theories’ influence can help when seeking to understand and possibly change clinical ethics committee routines. The paper is not a research report but is informed by a recent study in two London paediatric cardiac units. Forty-five practitioners and related experts were interviewed, including eight members of ethics committees, about the work of informing, preparing and supporting families during the extended process of consent to children’s elective heart surgery. The mosaic of multidisciplinary teamwork is reported in a series of papers about each profession, including this one on bioethics and law and clinical ethics committees’ influence on clinical practice. The qualitative social research was funded by the British Heart Foundation, in order that more may be known about the perioperative views and needs of all concerned. Questions included how disputes can be avoided, how high ethical standards and respectful cooperation between staff and families can be encouraged, and how minors’ consent or refusal may be respected, with the support of clinical ethics committees. SAGE Publications 2021-07-30 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9361409/ /pubmed/35967459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14777509211034145 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Empirical Ethics
Alderson, Priscilla
Bowman, Deborah
Brierley, Joe
J. Elliott, Martin
Kazmi, Romana
Mendizabal-Espinosa, Rosa
Montgomery, Jonathan
Sutcliffe, Katy
Wellesley, Hugo
Living bioethics, clinical ethics committees and children's consent to heart surgery
title Living bioethics, clinical ethics committees and children's consent to heart surgery
title_full Living bioethics, clinical ethics committees and children's consent to heart surgery
title_fullStr Living bioethics, clinical ethics committees and children's consent to heart surgery
title_full_unstemmed Living bioethics, clinical ethics committees and children's consent to heart surgery
title_short Living bioethics, clinical ethics committees and children's consent to heart surgery
title_sort living bioethics, clinical ethics committees and children's consent to heart surgery
topic Empirical Ethics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9361409/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35967459
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14777509211034145
work_keys_str_mv AT aldersonpriscilla livingbioethicsclinicalethicscommitteesandchildrensconsenttoheartsurgery
AT bowmandeborah livingbioethicsclinicalethicscommitteesandchildrensconsenttoheartsurgery
AT brierleyjoe livingbioethicsclinicalethicscommitteesandchildrensconsenttoheartsurgery
AT jelliottmartin livingbioethicsclinicalethicscommitteesandchildrensconsenttoheartsurgery
AT kazmiromana livingbioethicsclinicalethicscommitteesandchildrensconsenttoheartsurgery
AT mendizabalespinosarosa livingbioethicsclinicalethicscommitteesandchildrensconsenttoheartsurgery
AT montgomeryjonathan livingbioethicsclinicalethicscommitteesandchildrensconsenttoheartsurgery
AT sutcliffekaty livingbioethicsclinicalethicscommitteesandchildrensconsenttoheartsurgery
AT wellesleyhugo livingbioethicsclinicalethicscommitteesandchildrensconsenttoheartsurgery