首页> 外文期刊>Social science and medicine >Parental role in medical decision-making: fact or fiction? A comparative study of ethical dilemmas in French and American neonatal intensive care units.
【24h】

Parental role in medical decision-making: fact or fiction? A comparative study of ethical dilemmas in French and American neonatal intensive care units.

机译:父母在医疗决策中的作用:事实还是虚构?法国和美国新生儿重症监护病房在伦理困境方面的比较研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Neonatal intensive care has been studied from an epidemiological, ethical, medical and even sociological perspective, but little is known about the impact of parental involvement in decision-making, especially in critical cases. We rely here on a comparative, case-based approach to study the parental role in decision-making within two technologically identical but culturally and institutionally different contexts: France and the United States. These contexts rely on two opposed models of decision-making: parental autonomy in the United States and medical paternalism in France. This paternalism model excludes parents from the decision-making process. We investigate whether parental involvement leads to different outcomes from exclusively medically determined decisions or whether "technological imperatives" outplay all other factors to shape a unique, 'medically optimal' outcome. Using empirical data generated from extensive ethnographic fieldwork, in-depth interviews with 60 clinicians and 71 parents and chart review over a year in two neonatal intensive care units (one in France and one in the US), we analyze the factors that can explain the observed differences in decision-making in medically identical cases. Parental involvement and the legal context play a less role than physicians' differential use of certainty versus uncertainty in prognosis, a conclusion that corroborates the fact that medical control over ethical dilemmas remains even in the context of autonomy. French physicians do not ask parents permission to withdraw care (as expected in a paternalistic context); but symmetrically, American neonatologists (despite the prevailing autonomy model) tend not to ask permission to continue. The study provides an analysis of the making of "ethics", with an emphasis on how decisions are conceptualized as ethical dilemmas. The final conclusion is that the ongoing medical authority on ethics remains the key issue.
机译:从流行病学,伦理学,医学甚至社会学的角度对新生儿重症监护进行了研究,但是对于父母参与决策的影响知之甚少,特别是在危急病例中。在这里,我们依靠一种基于案例的比较方法来研究父母在两个技术上相同但在文化和体制上不同的背景下的决策中的作用:法国和美国。这些情况取决于两种相反的决策模型:美国的父母自治和法国的家长式医疗。这种家长式的模式将父母排除在决策过程之外。我们调查父母的参与是否会导致完全由医学上决定的结果不同,或者“技术要求”是否超过所有其他因素以形成独特的“医学上最理想”的结果。利用广泛的人种志田野调查得出的经验数据,在两个新生儿重症监护病房(法国一个和美国一个)中与60位临床医生和71位父母的深入访谈以及一年中的图表回顾,我们分析了可以解释该现象的因素在医学上相同的案例中观察到决策的差异。父母的参与和法律背景在医师预后方面的作用远不及医师对确定性和不确定性的区别使用,这一结论证实了即使在自主权的背景下,对道德困境的医学控制仍然存在的事实。法国医生不要求父母撤回照料(这是家长式的期望);但是相对而言,美国新生儿学家(尽管通行的自治模型)倾向于不寻求许可以继续。该研究提供了对“道德”形成的分析,并着重于如何将决策概念化为道德困境。最终结论是,持续不断的伦理医学权威仍然是关键问题。

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