Approximation and negotiation: clinical pragmatism and difference

Clinical Ethics from the Islamic Perspective : A qualitative study exploring the views of Jordanian doctors

Like other Arab countries, Jordan must find ways of responding to the rapid processes of change affecting many aspects of social life. This is particularly urgent in healthcare, where social and technical change is often manifested in tensions about ethical decision-making in the clinic. To explore the attitudes, beliefs and concerns relating to ethical decision-making among health professionals in Jordanian hospitals, a qualitative study was conducted involving face-to-face interviews with medical personnel in four hospitals in Amman, the capital of Jordan. Data were analysed thematically in relation to a pre-existing set of ethical categories. Interviews were conducted with thirty-eight doctors covering most medical specialities. Five major themes emerged from the interviews: ethical awareness, ethical issues, the impact of religion on ethical decision-making, practical and theoretical resources for ethical decision-making, and challenges. While uncertainty was expressed about some aspects of Western approaches to ethics, participants strongly supported adoption of a range of Western bioethical principles, including cultural and ethical diversity, along with adherence to Islamic religious norms. A range of serious ethical challenges facing the Jordanian health system were identified, covering social, legal, managerial, and technical issues. Ethical decision-making in Jordan is complex, having to accommodate the needs of patients, the opinions of doctors and their families, the views of religious authorities, managerial considerations, and both local norms and international standards. Health professionals struggle with three sets of tensions that emerge out of the struggle between traditional, community-embedded forms of social organization and the demands generated by globalization and the influence of Western culture: the tensions between tradition and modernity, conservatism and pragmatism, and religion and secularism. Doctors in Jordan prefer approaches to ethical decision-making that realize a balance between the extremes, although the exact nature of where that balance should lie remains uncertain.

Go in Peace: Brain Death, Reasonable Accommodation and Jewish Mourning Rituals

Religious objections to brain death are common among Orthodox Jews. These objections often lead to conflicts between families of patients who are diagnosed with brain death, and physicians and hospitals. Israel, New York and New Jersey (among other jurisdictions) include accommodation clauses in their regulations or laws regarding the determination of death by brain-death criteria. The purpose of these clauses is to allow families an opportunity to oppose or even veto (in the case of Israel and New Jersey) determinations of brain death. In New York, the extent and duration of this accommodation period are generally left to the discretion of individual institutions. Jewish tradition has embraced cultural and psychological mechanisms to help families cope with death and loss through a structured process that includes quick separation from the physical body of the dead and a gradual transition through phases of mourning (Aninut,Kriah, timely burial, Shiva, Shloshim, first year of mourning). This process is meant to help achieve closure, acceptance, support for the bereaved, commemoration, faith in the afterlife and affirmation of life for the survivors. We argue that the open-ended period of contention of brain death under the reasonable accommodation laws may undermine the deep psychological wisdom that informs the Jewish tradition. By promoting dispute and conflict, the process of inevitable separation and acceptance is delayed and the comforting rituals of mourning are deferred at the expense of the bereft family. Solutions to this problem may include separating discussions of organ donation from those concerning the diagnosis of brain death per se, allowing a period of no escalation of life-sustaining interventions rather than unilateral withdrawal of mechanical ventilation, engagement of rabbinical leaders in individual cases and policy formulations that prioritize emotional support for families.

Metodología para el análisis de casos clínicos en los Comités de Bioética. Enfoques y propuesta de apoyo

El presente trabajo examina y evalúa los modelos y las metodologías más importantes para la resolución de casos clínicos: 1) el principialismo, 2) el deontologismo, 3) el consecuencialismo, 4) la casuística, 5) la ética de la virtud y 6) la ética centrada en la persona (o ética “personalista”). Se sopesan las fortalezas y debilidades de cada una y se propone, además, un instrumento que facilite este tipo de análisis. Como grupo, se opta por una metodología que articula tres modelos: el enfoque de la virtud, el enfoque centrado en la persona y estos dos en armonía con una ética centrada en los principios. Las razones para esta opción integral están basadas, fundamentalmente, en el reconocimiento de la supremacía de la dignidad de la persona humana y de que las situaciones clínicas complejas requieren de una mirada integral tanto de la persona como de la práctica clínica. Esta última requiere de virtudes, principios éticos y del reconocimiento del ser humano como un ser dotado de dignidad intrínseca y, a su vez, como fundamento de la ética y de la práctica clínica.

Bioethics in a pluralistic society: bioethical methodology in lieu of moral diversity

In an attempt to promote in-depth dialogue amongst bioethicists coming from distinct disciplinary and religious backgrounds this essay offers a critical analysis of a number of the leading methods of addressing pluralism in bioethics and. Exploring the critiques and methodological proposals coming from the social sciences, the contract theorists, and the pragmatists, this study describes the problems which arise when confronting moral diversity in a bioethical context and examines the ability of these various methodologies to adequately resolve these matters. Finally, the foundations of a new conceptual framework for bioethical methodology will be developed. It will be argued that these new methodological insights are able to overcome the problems facing other methodologies and may provide a viable means for adequately addressing issues of pluralism in bioethics.

Islam and informed consent: notes from Doha

Informed consent is a perennial topic in bioethics. It has given the field a place in clinical practice and the law and is often the starting point for introductory instruction in medical ethics. One would think that nearly everything has been said and done on this well-worn topic.

Clinical pragmatism and the care of brain damaged patients: toward a palliative neuroethics for disorders of consciousness

Unraveling the mysteries of consciousness, lost and regained, and perhaps even intervening so as to prompt recovery are advances for which neither the clinical nor the lay community are prepared. These advances will shake existing expectations about severe brain damage and will find an unprepared clinical context, perhaps even one inhospitable to what should clearly be viewed as important advances. This could be the outcome of this line of inquiry, if this exceptionally imaginative research can continue at all. This work faces a restrictive research environment that has the potential to imperil it. Added to the complexity of the scientific challenges that must be overcome is the societal context in which these investigations must occur. Research on human consciousness goes to the heart of our humanity and asks us to grapple with fundamental questions about the self. Added to this is the regulatory complexity of research on subjects who may be unable to provide their own consent because of impaired decision-making capacity, itself a function of altered or impaired consciousness. These factors can lead to a restrictive view of research that can favor risk aversion over discovery. In this paper, I attempt to explain systematically some of these challenges. I suggest that some of the resistance might be tempered if we view the needs of patients with severe brain injury through the prism of palliative care and adopt that field's ethos and methods when caring for and conducting research on individuals with severe brain damage and disorders of consciousness. To make this argument I draw upon the American pragmatic tradition and utilize clinical pragmatism, a method of moral problem-solving that my colleagues and I have developed to address ethical challenges in clinical care and research.

Clinical pragmatism, ethics consultation, and the elderly patient

This article describes a process of moral problem solving for medicine termed clinical pragmatism. A structured and disciplined method of addressing ethical problems in medical practice that clinicians will find useful in their daily routines is provided. After outlining the method of clinical pragmatism, the authors illustrate its use in a case involving an older patient refusing medical treatment and conclude with comments on the importance of the process in ethics case consultation.