DOCSLIB.ORG

Tables of Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Journal of Clinical Ethics: Tables of Contents 2019 The Journal of Clinical Ethics, Volume 30, Number 4, Winter 2019 At the Bedside Ethical Issues Posed by Face Transplants Edmund G. Howe Features Self-Inflicted Moral Distress: Opportunity for a Fuller Exercise of Professionalism Jeffrey T. Berger, Ann B. Hamric, and Elizabeth Epstein The Ethics of Psychosocial Assessment in Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation: A Call for Transparency of Process to Support the Equitable Selection of Patients Laura L. Kimberly, Michelle W. McQuinn, Arthur L. Caplan, and Nomi C. Levy-Carrick An Algorithmic Approach to Patients Who Refuse Care But Lack Medical Decision-Making Capacity Stephanie A. Larson, Sindhuja Surapaneni, Kevin Wack, and Maura George The Role of Informed Consent for Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke Amber R. Comer, Teresa M. Damush, Alexia M. Torke, and Linda S. Williams Family Presence During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Zohar Lederman Case and Analysis from Brigham and Women’s Hospital Home Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment for a Patient with Opioid Use Disorder Daniel A. Solomon, Christin N. Price, and Nicholas Sadovnikoff Perspectives Being with and Being for: Flourishing, Suffering, and Joy in a Ugandan Hospital Ryan Gillespie Family-Centered Culture Care: Touched by an Angel Jesus A. Hernandez The Journal of Clinical Ethics, Volume 30, Number 3, Fall 2019 At the Bedside Treating Children Maximally: Practical Applications Edmund G. Howe Features Better than Best (Interest Standard) in Pediatric Decision Making Lainie Friedman Ross Offering the “Reasonable Interests Standard” in Response to Ross’s Analysis of the Best Interests Standard D. Micah Hester Guidance and Intervention Principles in Pediatrics: The Need for Pluralism Mark Christopher Navin and Jason Adam Wasserman Decision Making on Behalf of Children: Understanding the Role of the Harm Principle Douglas S. Diekema When Better Isn’t Good Enough: Commentary on Ross’s “Better than Best (Interest Standard) in Pediatric Decision Making” Erica K. Salter Constrained Parental Autonomy and the Interests of Children in Non-Intimate Families Erin Paquette The Best Interest Standard Is the Best We Have: Why the Harm Principle and Constrained Parental Autonomy Cannot Replace the Best Interest Standard in Pediatric Ethics Johan C. Bester In Further Defense of “Better than Best (Interest)” Lainie Friedman Ross Pediatric Decision Making: Ross, Rawls, and Getting Children and Families Right Norman Quist A Working Un-Conference A Working Un-Conference to Advance Innovations Among Clinical Ethics Programs Hilary Mabel and Paul J. Ford Clarifying a Clinical Ethics Service’s Value, the Visible and the Hidden Laura Guidry-Grimes, Marika Warren, Hannah I. Lipman, Kelly Kent, Kaarkuzhali Babu Krishnamurthy, Arlene M. Davis, Thomas May, Marycon Chin Jiro, and Jane Jankowski Emerging Roles of Clinical Ethicists Jeffrey S. Farroni, Emma Tumilty, Debjani Mukherjee, Susan McCammon, David M. Chooljian, and Margot M. Eves Pediatric Ethics Consultation: Practical Considerations for the Clinical Ethics Consultant Caroline A. Buchanan, Johan C. Bester, Bethany Bruno, Clare Delany, Kerri O. Kennedy, Tracy Koogler, Nneka O. Sederstrom, Jessica A. Moore, and Kathryn L. Weise Comprehensive Quality Assessment in Clinical Ethics Services Thomas V. Cunningham, Andrea Chatburn, Cynthia Coleman, Evan DeRenzo, Kristin Furfari, John Frye, III, Avery C. Glover, Matthew Kenney, Nico Nortje, Janet Malek, Mark Repenshek, Flora Sheppard, and Joshua S. Crites Letters Letter: Words Matter in the Lives of Transgender Youth: Response to “Family Discordance Regarding Fertility Preservation for a Transgender Teen: An Ethical Case Study” Beth A. Clark and Alice Virani Letter: In Response to “Words Matter in the Lives of Transgender Youth” Gwendolyn P. Quinn, Amani Sampson, Lisa Campo-Engelstein, and Leena Nahata The Journal of Clinical Ethics, Volume 30, Number 2, Summer 2019 At the Bedside When Adolescents May Die Edmund G. Howe Features The States as Laboratories: Regulation of Decisions for Incapacitated Patients Erin S. DeMartino and Joshua A. Rolnick The Clinician as Clinical Ethics Consultant: An Empirical Method of Study Donald S. Kornfeld and Kenneth Prager The ASBH Approach to Certify Clinical Ethics Consultants Is Both Premature and Inadequate Mark Siegler Roles of the Clinical Ethics Consultant: A Response to Kornfeld and Prager, David Michael Vaughan, Rebecca Permar, Corisa Rakestraw, Ryan Hart, Leslie C. Griffin, and William J. Winslade Moving Towards a New Hospital Model of Clinical Ethics Evan G. DeRenzo Elements of an Ethics Consultation John C. Fletcher and Edward M. Spencer Physicians’ Perspectives on Adolescent and Young Adult Advance Care Planning: The Fallacy of Informed Decision Making Jennifer S. Needle, Cynthia Peden-McAlpine, and Joan Liaschenko Fertility Preservation for a Teenager with Differences (Disorders) of Sex Development: An Ethics Case Study Lisa Campo-Engelstein, Diane Chen, Arlene B. Baratz, Emilie K. Johnson, and Courtney Finlayson Medical Education and Practice Perils of the Hidden Curriculum: Emotional Labor and “Bad” Pediatric Proxies Margaret Waltz, R. Jean Cadigan, Benny Joyner, Paul Ossman, and Arlene Davis Consent Obtained by Residents: Informed by the Uninformed? Alan R. Tait The Journal of Clinical Ethics, Volume 30, Number 1, Spring 2019 At the Bedside The Edge-of-the-Field of Clinical Ethics Now, After 30 Years: Does Research Ethics Show Us the Way? Edmund D. Howe Special Section: 30 Years of The Journal of Clinical Ethics Clinical Medical Ethics: Its History and Contributions to American Medicine Mark Siegler Once and Future Clinical Neuroethics: A History of What Was and What Might Be Joseph J. Fins Clinical Ethics in Pediatrics: An International Perspective John D. Lantos, Sarosh Saleem, Fajar Raza, Janicke Syltern, Erwin J. Khoo, Arpana Iyengar, Priya Pais, Jagdish Chinnappa, Pablo Lezama-Del Valle, and André Kidszun Reflection of a Physician-Writer: On Why I Write Ranjana Srivastava “Clinical” Surgical Ethics Peter Angelos Ethics and Evidence Daniel P. Sulmasy Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Informed Consent, and Rescue: What Provides Moral Justification for the Provision of CPR? Johan Bester and Eric Kodish 2018 The Journal of Clinical Ethics, Volume 29, Number 4 (Winter 2018) At the Bedside Helping Patients to Achieve What They Find Most Meaningful in Life Edmund G. Howe Familial Discordance Regarding Fertility Preservation for a Transgender Teen: An Ethical Case Study Gwendolyn P. Quinn, Amani Sampson, and Lisa Campo-Engelstein Proxy Consent by a Physician When a Patient’s Capacity Is Equivocal: Respecting a Patient’s Autonomy by Overriding the Patient’s Ostensible Treatment Preferences Abraham Graber, Carolyn April, and Michael D. April Training to Increase Rater Reliability When Assessing the Quality of Ethics Consultation Records with the Ethics Consultation Quality Assessment Tool (ECQAT) Robert Allan Pearlman, David Alfandre, Barbara L. Chanko, Mary Beth Foglia, and Kenneth A. Berkowitz Technical Considerations for Implementation of Tele-Ethics Consultation in the Intensive Care Unit Laura S. Johnson. David M. Brennan, and Nneka O. Sederstrom Systematic Review of Typologies Used to Characterize Clinical Ethics Consultations Jennifer E. deSante-Bertkau, Michelle L. McGowan, and Armand H. Matheny Antommaria Justice and Respect for Autonomy: Jehovah’s Witnesses and Kidney Transplant Paul J. Cummins and Federico Nicoli Cases from the Cleveland Clinic Discomfort as a Catalyst: An Ethical Analysis of Donation after Cardiac Death in a Patient with Locked-In Syndrome Bethany Bruno and Margot M. Eves Perspective To Give or Not to Give: The Challenge of Pharmaceutical Coupons Mihail Zilbermint and Louise Schiavone The Journal of Clinical Ethics Volume 29, Number 3, Fall 2018 At the Bedside How We May Become Detached from Our Patients and What We Can Do If This Happens Edmund G. Howe Features Deathbed Confession: When a Dying Patient Confesses to Murder: Clinical, Ethical, and Legal Implications Laura Tincknell, Anne O’Callaghan, Joanna Manning, and Phillipa Malpas Ethical Challenges in Acute Evaluation of Suspected Psychogenic Stroke Mimics Alexandra J. Sequeira, Michael G. Fara, and Ariane Lewis Positive HIV Test Results from Deceased Organ Donors: Should We Disclose to Next of Kin? Anne L. Dalle Ave and David M. Shaw Posthumous HIV Disclosure and Relational Rupture Laura K. Guidry-Grimes and D. Micah Hester Plain Anabaptists and Healthcare Ethics James Benedict Refusal of Vaccination: A Test to Balance Societal and Individual Interests Kavita Shah Arora, Jane Morris, and Allan J. Jacobs Nursing Ethics Huddles to Decrease Moral Distress among Nurses in the Intensive Care Unit Marianne C. Chiafery, Patrick Hopkins, Sally A. Norton, and Margie Hodges Shaw “I Would Do It All Over Again”: Cherishing Time and the Absence of Regret in Continuing a Pregnancy after a Life-Limiting Diagnosis Charlotte Wool, Rana Limbo, and Erin M. Denney-Koelsch Perspectives The Mission of Safety Net Hospitals: Charity or Equity? Thea James Scribes, Electronic Health Records, and the Expectation of Confidentiality Paul M. Wangenheim The Journal of Clinical Ethics, Volume 29, Number 2, Summer 2018 At the Bedside Edge-of-the-Field Ethics Consulting: What Are We Missing? Edmund G. Howe Features Psychiatric Diagnoses and Informed Consent Andrew Clark Response to “Psychiatric Diagnoses and Informed Consent” David Brendel TTaPP: Together Take a Pause and Ponder: A Critical Thinking
Recommended publications
  • Neuro-Advancements and the Role of Nurses As Stated in Academic Literature and Canadian Newspapers

    Neuro-Advancements and the Role of Nurses As Stated in Academic Literature and Canadian Newspapers

    societies Article Neuro-Advancements and the Role of Nurses as Stated in Academic Literature and Canadian Newspapers Rochelle Deloria 1 and Gregor Wolbring 2,* 1 Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N4N1, Canada 2 Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies, Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N4N1, Canada * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 14 April 2019; Accepted: 22 August 2019; Published: 26 August 2019 Abstract: Neurosciences and neurotechnologies (from now on called neuro-advancements) constantly evolve and influence all facets of society. Neuroethics and neuro-governance discourses focus on the impact of neuro-advancements on individuals and society, and stakeholder involvement is identified as an important aspect of being able to deal with such an impact. Nurses engage with neuro-advancements within their occupation, including neuro-linked assistive technologies, such as brain-computer interfaces, cochlear implants, and virtual reality. The role of nurses is multifaceted and includes being providers of clinical and other health services, educators, advocates for their field and their clients, including disabled people, researchers, and influencers of policy discourses. Nurses have a stake in how neuro-advancements are governed, therefore, being influencers of neuroethics and neuro-governance discourses should be one of these roles. Lifelong learning and professional development could be one mechanism to increase the knowledge of nurses about ethical, social, and legal issues linked to neuro-advancements, which in turn, would allow nurses to provide meaningful input towards neuro-advancement discussions. Disabled people are often the recipients of neuro-advancements and are clients of nurses, therefore, they have a stake in the way nurses interact with neuro-advancements and influence the sociotechnical context of neuro-advancements, which include neuro-linked assistive devices.
  • CECA COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES May 17, 2012 PRESENT

    CECA COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES May 17, 2012 PRESENT

    CECA COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES May 17, 2012 PRESENT ABSENT Armand Antommaria Jack Gallagher Art Derse Christine Mitchell Bob Baker (Code liaison) Nneka Mokwunye Ken Berkowitz Tia Powell Jeffrey Berger Marty Smith Joseph Carrese Brian Childs Paula Goodman-Crews Ann Heesters Martha Jurchak Kayhan Parsi Kathy Powderly Terry Rosell Wayne Shelton Jeffrey Spike Anita Tarzian (chair) Lucia Wocial Pearls & Pitfalls paper The “HCEC PEARLS AND PITFALLS”: Suggested Do’s And Don’ts for Health Care Ethics Consultants” manuscript has been accepted by JCE. JCE will retain the copyright for the full article, but the Pearls & Pitfalls themselves can be posted on ASBH website and used by others (with appropriate citation). Timing of the publication has not yet been established. Joe mentioned the statement in the current manuscript that readers can provide feedback about the paper on the ASBH website. Kayhan mentioned that ASBH’s website is currently undergoing revision, and will check with Chris Welber at AMC regarding the ability to have visitors post feedback on a specific location of the website. The manuscript will be modified accordingly before publication to match website capacity. Update from Board The Board is asking that CECA submit the Request for Proposals that was previously put on hold pending the Quality Attestation efforts underway. The Board has decided to pursue both activities in parallel. Anita will circulate the current RFP draft to CECA members to identify a process for completing this and submitting to the Board. The Board is developing operating standards for ASBH standing committees, which will impact CECA’s recent discussion about term limits and member rotation.
  • Position on Bioethics

    Position on Bioethics

    Position on Bioethics Background Bioethics refers to the application of ethical principles to address potential ethical questions arising from biological research, science and medicine. Bioethics may include ethical dimensions of medical research, clinical trials, use of different forms of technology in healthcare, public policy, prioritization of research and resources, and much more. For any company involved in healthcare, bioethics questions frequently arise and require resolutions based on accepted bioethics principles. The four commonly accepted principles of bioethics1 are: • Autonomy: Requires that the patient have autonomy of thought, intention and action when making decisions regarding healthcare procedures and must give fully informed consent with knowledge of all risks and benefits of the procedure and the likelihood of success. • Justice: Requires that procedures uphold the spirit of existing laws and are fair to all players involved, ensuring that no population be overly burdened or overly valued in research and scientific progress. • Beneficence: Requires that the procedure be provided with the intent of doing good for the patient involved, considers individual circumstances of all patients and strives for net benefit. • Non-maleficence: Requires that a procedure does not harm the patient involved or others in society. Relevance Bioethics plays a critical role in the advancement of human health by ensuring safe, ethical and just applications of new science and technological and therapeutic breakthroughs. As the world’s largest and most broadly based healthcare company, reaching patients and consumers each day with our medicines, consumer care products and medical devices, Johnson & Johnson is a leader in healthcare research and development. We employ significant resources in the development of new medicines and medical devices and their application.
  • The Impossibility of Informed Consent?

    The Impossibility of Informed Consent?

    JME40: Good medical ethics J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/medethics-2014-102308 on 16 December 2014. Downloaded from PAPER The impossibility of informed consent? Kenneth Boyd Correspondence to ABSTRACT medical ethics’ over the 40 years of the Journal’s Professor Kenneth Boyd, The problematic nature of informed consent to medical publication. Biomedical Teaching Organisation, Edinburgh treatment and research, and its relation to autonomy, trust and clinical practice, has been addressed on many University, Edinburgh, Scotland Surveying the scene: the law and ethics of EH89AG, UK; occasions and from a variety of ethical perspectives in informed consent to treatment and research [email protected] the pages of the Journal of Medical Ethics. This paper Two early and wide-ranging contributions on medi- gives an account of how discussion of these issues has Received 1 September 2014 colegal and ethical aspects of informed consent developed and changed, by describing a number of Revised 26 September 2014 were made in papers by judge Kirby3 of Australia Accepted 23 October 2014 significant contributions to these debates which provide in 1983 and paediatrician Silverman4 of the USA in examples of ‘doing good medical ethics’ over the 1989. Both agreed that a paternalist or beneficence- 40 years of the Journal’s publication. based approach, in which the doctor recommends a course of treatment to which the patient either con- sents or refuses, had properly been superseded by THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF INFORMED CONSENT? an approach based on respect for the autonomy or Awareness that informed consent is problematic, in right to self-determination of the individual theory and in practice, was already evident in the patient.
  • The Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements

    The Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements

    Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements 1 Public review draft for reading* Note: To submit comments about this draft, please use the per-Provision files and cite the line numbers to which you are referring. The Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements Silver Spring, Maryland 2014 * For public review and comment May 6 through June 6, 2014. Not for attribution or distribution © 2014 American Nurses Association Note: To submit comments about this draft, please use the per-Provision files and cite the line numbers to which you are referring. Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements 2 Public review draft for reading* Note: To submit comments about this draft, please use the per-Provision files and cite the line numbers to which you are referring. Contents The Code of Ethics for Nurses Preface Provision 1 1.1 Respect for human dignity 1.2 Relationships to patients 1.3 The nature of health 1.4 The right to self-determination 1.5 Relationships with colleagues and others Provision 2 2.1 Primacy of the patient's interests 2.2 Conflict of interest for nurses 2.3 Collaboration 2.4 Professional boundaries Provision 3 3.1 Protection of the rights of privacy and confidentiality 3.2 Protection of human participants in research 3.3 Performance standards and review mechanisms 3.4 Professional competence in nursing practice 3.5 Protecting patient health and safety by action on questionable practice 3.6 Patient protection and impaired practice * For public review and comment May 6 through June 6, 2014. Not for attribution or distribution © 2014 American Nurses Association Note: To submit comments about this draft, please use the per-Provision files and cite the line numbers to which you are referring.
  • Top 50 Bioethics Journals and Top 250 Most Cited Bioethics Articles Since 2011, 2016 Edition May 23, 2016 | BRL Blog, Featured

    Top 50 Bioethics Journals and Top 250 Most Cited Bioethics Articles Since 2011, 2016 Edition May 23, 2016 | BRL Blog, Featured

    U a Top 50 Bioethics Journals and Top 250 Most Cited Bioethics Articles Since 2011, 2016 Edition May 23, 2016 | BRL Blog, Featured This 2016 edition of the “top bioethics journals and articles” list includes updated rankings for bioethics journals and new citation metrics for articles published in 2015, as well as updates for previous years’ top articles. Links to the publisher pages are included for each article as well as links to their citation page on Google Scholar. The average H5 index for the top fifty-two journals is 13.38, with a tied high of 28 and a minimum of 6. Here are the top top 52 journals and 252 most cited articles from the top bioethics journals published in 2009 through 2015. View the Top Articles by Year: 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011. About this Analysis This is an updated citation analysis for 2011 through 2015 of the top 100 bioethics journals. I’ve included the top 50 journals and the top cited articles per year including the h5 ranking. Just over 20,000 articles were analyzed in this dataset, shared here as a spreadsheet. If you’re interested in using this study in a publication or presentation please let me know so I can share a link to your research on this blog post. I utilized Harzing’s Publish or Perish software over a period of 10 days to gather this new data in May, 2016. The citation metrics are from Google Scholar’s index. Author: Mark Hakkarinen, M.A. Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University.
  • Religion and Ethics in Pluralistic Healthcare Contexts

    Religion and Ethics in Pluralistic Healthcare Contexts

    RELIGION AND ETHICS IN PLURALISTIC HEALTHCARE CONTEXTS May 10 –12, 2012 Trinity Western University Langley, BC Faith & Nursing Symposium trinity western university, langley, bc, may 10-12th, 2012 Program Overview day 1 – thursday, may 10th, 2012 7-9 pm Registration and Conference Opening Reception day 2 – friday, may 11th, 2012 8 am Registration (Coffee, Breakfast) 8:30 am Welcome and Conference Opening 8:45 am plenary session Beth Johnston Taylor “What Does Spirituality Mean to Nursing?” 9:45 am Poster Overviews 10:15 am Morning Coffee 10:45 am concurrent sessions 1 12:45 pm Lunch 1:45 pm plenary session Marsha Fowler “Religious Ethics: What Are the Imperatives and the Risks?” 2:45 pm Panel of Book Authors (Moderator: Jan Storch) 4 pm Book Signing and Reception 5:30 pm BBQ Dinner 7 pm public panel Jas Cheema, Janice Clarke, Rani Srivastava, Evelyn Voyageur “A Multi-Faith Dialogue on Diversity and Health Care Services” day 3 – saturday, may 12th, 2012 The conference committee is grateful for the 8 am Registration (Coffee, Breakfast) support of the conference from the Priscilla 8:30 am plenary session Sonya Grypma and Stranford Reid Trust Foundation “Angels of Mercy? Religion, History and Nursing Identity” 9:15 am concurrent sessions 2 and the twu Internal Grants program. 10:15 am Morning Coffee 10:45 am concurrent sessions 3 12:15 am Lunch 1:15 pm plenary session Donal O’Mathuna “A Christian Perspective on Health Care Ethics in Pluralistic Societies” 2 pm Afternoon Tea 2:30 pm workshop “Nursing at the Borderlands of Religious and Cultural
  • Whose Life Is It Anyway? a Study in Respect for Autonomy

    Whose Life Is It Anyway? a Study in Respect for Autonomy

    Journal ofmedical ethics 1995; 21: 179-183 J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/jme.21.3.179 on 1 June 1995. Downloaded from Medicine and literature Whose Life Is It Anyway? A study in respect for autonomy Margaret Norden Marymount University, Arlington, Virginia, USA Abstract Precis of the story Brian Clark's drama, Whose Life Is It Anyway? (1), Whose Life Is It Anyway? opens with the explores the difficulties ofapplying the principle of hospitalization of Ken Harrison who was critically respect for autonomy to real-life circumstances. In the injured in an automobile accident four months play a permanently disabled patient, who wishes to be earlier and permanently paralyzed from the neck allowed to die, raises moral questions about the down. Although Ken arrived in critical condition, he adequacy of the autonomous agent, respect for the has since been stabilized, informed by his doctors autonomy ofothers, the authority of the law, the that his paralysis is permanent, and advised that he allocation ofsociety's resources, and the intrinsic value will be transferred to a long-term care facility. Facing ofhuman life. After a brief review of the story and the prospect of such an existence, Ken chooses not definition of respect for autonomy, this paper cites to live. He realizes that he could not survive outside passages from the play that dramatize the tension of an institution, and therefore, requests a discharge. between respect for autonomy and these other moral Although a psychiatrist confirms Ken's mental copyright. concerns. There follows a review of relevant competence, the hospital doctors refuse to discharge commentary from the classicists Kant and Mill and the him.
  • Human Challenge Trials for Vaccine Development: Regulatory Considerations

    Human Challenge Trials for Vaccine Development: Regulatory Considerations

    POST ECBS Version ENGLISH ONLY EXPERT COMMITTEE ON BIOLOGICAL STANDARDIZATION Geneva, 17 to 21 October 2016 Human Challenge Trials for Vaccine Development: regulatory considerations © World Health Organization 2016 All rights reserved. Publications of the World Health Organization can be obtained from WHO Press, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland (tel.: +41 22 791 3264; fax: +41 22 791 4857; e-mail: [email protected]). Requests for permission to reproduce or translate WHO publications – whether for sale or for noncommercial distribution – should be addressed to WHO Press, at the above address (fax: +41 22 791 4806; email: [email protected]). The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader.
  • Informed Consent and Refusal

    Informed Consent and Refusal

    CHAPTER 3 Informed Consent and Refusal Evolution of the doctrine of informed consent Elements of informed consent and refusal The nature of informed consent Exceptions to the consent requirement Mrs. Stack is a 67- year- old woman admitted with rectal bleeding, chronic renal in- sufficiency, diabetes, and blindness. On admission, she was alert and capacitated. Two weeks later, she suffered a cardiopulmonary arrest, was resuscitated and intu- bated, and was transferred to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) in an unrespon- sive and unstable state. Consent for emergency dialysis was obtained from her son, who is also her health care agent. Dialysis was repeated two days later. During the past several years, Mrs. Stack has consistently stated to her family and her primary care doctor that she would never want to be on chronic dialysis and she has refused it numerous times when it was recommended. The physician, who has known and treated Mrs. Stack for many years, also treated her daughter who had been on chronic dialysis for some time and had died after suffering a heart attack. According to the physician and the patient’s family, Mrs. Stack’s refusal of dialysis has been based on her conviction that her daughter died as a result of the dialysis treatments. Mrs. Stack’s mental status has cleared considerably and, despite the ventilator, she is able to communicate nonverbally. Although she appears to understand the benefits of dialysis and the consequences of refusing it, including deterioration and eventual death, she has consistently and vehemently refused further treatments. Her capacity to make this decision is not now in question.
  • How to Think About Wild Animal Suffering

    How to Think About Wild Animal Suffering

    How to Think About Wild Animal Suffering ! m a g e + J i m b o o m b a P o l i c e , T h e T i m e s ( A free lecture by Dale Jamieson, PhD Professor of Environmental Studies and Philosophy, New York University Director, Center for Environmental and Animal Protection Monday, February 3rd, 4:00 – 5:20 p.m. David Strong Building, Rm. # C126 It has been widely reported that more than a billion animals have been killed in Australia in the fires that have been raging since late last year. The Australian grandmother who risked her life to save a Koala from a burning tree is widely seen as a hero. Yet in the normal course of events billions of animals die every day (including about 150 million for food). Are we obliged to do what we can to save them all? The logic of at least some animal protection philosophies seems to say “yes:” We should eliminate suffering whenever and wherever we can, whether it is caused by human action, by the predation of one animal on another, or by the impersonal workings of nature. But to many environmentalists and others, this vision of “policing nature” seems mad or worse. Questions about wild animal suffering not only threaten to disrupt alliances between animal protectionists and environmentalist, but go to the very heart of what it is to be human living in a natural world. While I do not purport to provide the correct answers to the many questions in this area, I do hope to clarify some of the issues and contribute to thinking clearly about them.
  • Milestones in Jewish Medical Ethics: Medical

    Milestones in Jewish Medical Ethics: Medical

    Milestones in Jewish Medical Ethics Medical-Halachic Literature in Israel, 1948-1998 Mordechai Halperin, M.D. Main Chapters A. Definition of Concepts E. Third Decade 1. Introduction 1. The Dr. Falk Schlesinger Institute for 2. Medical Ethics Medical-Halachic Research 3. Jewish Medical Ethics 2. Assia 4. Medicine and Jewish Law 3. Moriah 5. Medicine and Halalcha 4. Mahanayim 6. Medicine & Judaism 5. Pathology and the Talmud 6. Lev Avraham B. Medical Halachic Literature: 7. Other Publications Ancient Times 1. From the Biblical Period through F. Fourth Decade the Eighteenth Century 1. Nishmat Avraham 2. From the Early Nineteenth Century 2. The Medical-Halachic Encyclopedia until the Establishment of the (Hebrew Edition) State of Israel 3. The Foundations of the Law Act - 3. Fifty Years of Statehood 1980 4. Judge Amnon Carmi and The Society C. First Decade for Medicine and Law in Israel 1. The Chief Rabbis: Rabbi Isaac 5. Technological Halachic Institutes Hertzog and Rabbi Ben-Tsiyyon 6. Additional Publications Meir Hai Uziel 7. The Jacobovits Center 2. Ha-Torah ve-Ha-Mdinah for Jewish Medical Ethics 3. Tsits Eli‘ezer 8. Special Lectures for Physicians 4. No‘am: Platform for Clarification of Halachic Problems G. Fifth Decade 5. Other Authorities 1. International Conferences in America and Israel D. Second Decade 2. Jewish Medical Ethics (JME) 1. First Bestseller: Shemirat Shabbat 3. Multimedia Halacha and Medicine ke-Hilchata 4. Precedents in Medicine and Law 2. Jewish Medical Ethics 5. Yael Shefer vs. The State of Israel 3. Tora She-be‘al Peh and Ha-Ma‘ayan 6. The Value of The State of Israel and The Patient Rights Act 7.