Journal of medical ethics
-
Payment for research participation has raised ethical concerns, especially with respect to its potential for coercion. We argue that characterising payment for research participation as coercive is misguided, because offers of benefit cannot constitute coercion. In this article we analyse the concept of coercion, refute mistaken conceptions of coercion and explain why the offer of payment for research participation is never coercive but in some cases may produce undue inducement.
-
Journal of medical ethics · May 2008
The practicalities of terminally ill patients signing their own DNR orders--a study in Taiwan.
To investigate the current situation of completing the informed consent for do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders among the competent patients with terminal illness and the ethical dilemmas related to it. ⋯ The family-oriented culture in Asian countries may violate the principles of the Patient Self-Determination Act and the requirements of the Hospice Care Law in Taiwan, which inevitably poses an ethical dilemma. Earlier truth-telling and continuing education of the public by hospice care workers will be helpful in solving such ethical dilemmas.
-
Journal of medical ethics · May 2008
The views of cancer patients on patient rights in the context of information and autonomy.
The aim of this study is to evaluate the views of cancer patients on patient rights in the context of the right to information and autonomy according to articles related to the issue in the "Patient Rights Regulation". ⋯ There are extensive efforts in Turkey towards making patient rights a significant supportive component of health services. For patient rights to become a natural part of medical practice it is necessary to give priority to education of both patients and physicians about patient rights and to lay emphasis on an ethical approach in the patient-physician relationship.
-
Journal of medical ethics · May 2008
To what extent should older patients be included in decisions regarding their resuscitation status?
As medical technology continues to advance and we develop the expertise to keep people alive in states undreamt of even 20 years ago, there is increasing interest in the ethics of providing, or declining to provide, life-sustaining treatment. One such issue, highly contentious in clinical practice as well as in the media (and, through them, the public), is the use of do-not-attempt-resuscitation orders. ⋯ This article explores some of the arguments regarding who should make the decision to implement such an order, with particular reference to older people and the unique issues they face in relation to resuscitation. The author concludes by arguing that official guidelines, while representing an ideal, are not easily applied in a typical acute setting where decisions regarding resuscitation are most commonly made, and makes suggestions as to how they may be implemented more successfully.