...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Ethics >The principle of respect for autonomy – Concordant with the experience of oncology physicians and molecular biologists in their daily work?
【24h】

The principle of respect for autonomy – Concordant with the experience of oncology physicians and molecular biologists in their daily work?

机译:尊重自主权的原则–是否与肿瘤医师和分子生物学家的日常工作相一致?

获取原文
           

摘要

Background This article presents results from a qualitative empirical investigation of how Danish oncology physicians and Danish molecular biologists experience the principle of respect for autonomy in their daily work. Methods This study is based on 12 semi-structured interviews with three groups of respondents: a group of oncology physicians working in a clinic at a public hospital and two groups of molecular biologists conducting basic research, one group employed at a public university and the other in a private biopharmaceutical company. Results We found that that molecular biologists consider the principle of respect for autonomy as a negative obligation, where the informed consent of patients or research subjects should be respected. Furthermore, molecular biologists believe that very sick patients are constraint by the circumstances to a certain choice. However, in contrast to molecular biologists, oncology physicians experience the principle of respect for autonomy as a positive obligation, where the physician in dialogue with the patient performs a medical prognosis based on the patient's wishes and ideas, mutual understanding and respect. Oncology physicians believe that they have a positive obligation to adjust to the level of the patient when providing information making sure that the patient understands. Oncology physicians experience situations where the principle of respect for autonomy does not apply because the patient is in a difficult situation. Conclusion In this study we explore the moral views and attitudes of oncology physicians and molecular biologists and compare these views with bioethical theories of the American bioethicists Tom L. Beauchamp & James F. Childress and the Danish philosophers Jakob Rendtorff & Peter Kemp. This study shows that essential parts of the two bioethical theories are reflected in the daily work of Danish oncology physicians and Danish molecular biologists. However, the study also explores dimensions where the theories can be developed further to be concordant with biomedical practice. The hope is that this study enhances the understanding of the principle of respect for autonomy and the way it is practiced.
机译:背景技术本文介绍了对丹麦肿瘤医师和丹麦分子生物学家在日常工作中如何体验尊重自主原则的定性实证研究。方法:本研究基于对三组受访者的12次半结构化访谈:一组在公立医院诊所工作的肿瘤医师和两组进行基础研究的分子生物学家,一组在公立大学任职,另一组在公立大学任职。在一家私人生物制药公司。结果我们发现,分子生物学家认为尊重自主权的原则是一项消极义务,应尊重患者或研究对象的知情同意。此外,分子生物学家认为,病情严重的患者在一定条件下只能选择某种方式。然而,与分子生物学家相反,肿瘤医师将尊重自主权的原则视为一项积极义务,即与患者对话的医师根据患者的意愿和想法,相互理解和尊重进行医疗预后。肿瘤医师认为,他们在提供确保患者理解的信息时有积极的责任来适应患者的水平。肿瘤内科医师会遇到因患者处境困难而无法遵守尊重自主原则的情况。结论在这项研究中,我们探索了肿瘤医师和分子生物学家的道德观点和态度,并将这些观点与美国生物伦理学家汤姆·L·博尚和詹姆斯·F·德雷斯雷斯以及丹麦哲学家雅各布·伦多夫和彼得·肯普的生物伦理理论进行了比较。这项研究表明,这两种生物伦理学理论的重要组成部分反映在丹麦肿瘤学医师和丹麦分子生物学家的日常工作中。但是,该研究还探讨了可以进一步发展理论以与生物医学实践相一致的维度。希望这项研究能够增进对尊重自主原则及其实践方式的理解。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号