首页> 外文期刊>Theoretical medicine and bioethics >Proportionality, terminal suffering and the restorative goals of medicine.
【24h】

Proportionality, terminal suffering and the restorative goals of medicine.

机译:比例,末期痛苦和医学的恢复目标。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Recent years have witnessed a growing concern that terminally ill patients are needlessly suffering in the dying process. This has led to demands that physicians become more attentive in the assessment of suffering and that they treat their patients as 'whole persons.' For the most part, these demands have not fallen on deaf ears. It is now widely accepted that the relief of suffering is one of the fundamental goals of medicine. Without question this is a positive development. However, while the importance of treating suffering has generally been acknowledged, insufficient attention has been paid to the question of whether different types of terminal suffering require different responses from health care professionals. In this paper we introduce a distinction between two types of suffering likely to be present at the end of life, and we argue that physicians must distinguish between these types if they are to respond appropriately to the suffering of their terminally ill patients. After introducing this distinction and explaining its basis, we further argue that the distinction informs a (novel) principle of proportionality, one that should guide physicians in balancing their competing obligations in responding to terminal suffering. As we explain, this principle is justified by reference to the interests terminally ill patients have in restoration, as well as in the relief of suffering, at the end of life.
机译:近年来,越来越多的人担心临终病患者在临终过程中会不必要地遭受痛苦。这导致要求医生在评估痛苦方面变得更加专心,并且将患者视为“整个人”。在大多数情况下,这些要求并未置若de闻。现在,人们普遍认为减轻痛苦是医学的基本目标之一。毫无疑问,这是一个积极的发展。然而,尽管人们普遍认识到治疗痛苦的重要性,但对于不同类型的末期痛苦是否需要医护人员做出不同反应的问题并未给予足够的重视。在本文中,我们对寿命终了时可能出现的两种类型的痛苦进行了区分,并且我们认为,如果医生要对绝症患者的痛苦做出适当的反应,则必须对这两种类型进行区分。在介绍了这种区别并解释了其依据之后,我们进一步认为,这种区别体现了一种(新颖的)比例原则,该原则应指导医生在应对最终痛苦时平衡其竞争义务。正如我们所解释的,通过参考临终病人在生命的尽头恢复和减轻痛苦中的利益,这一原则是合理的。

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