AbstractOne factor that impedes medical students from speaking up about ethical situations is the lack of sufficient knowledge and skills in conflict resolution. This may also affect students\' decision and timing to intervene. This article will provide practical ways to effectively and efficiently address the medical student\'s ethical case presented in August A. Culbert et al.\'s \"Navigating Informed Consent and Patient Safety in Surgery: Lessons for Medical Students and Junior Trainees.\"

BACKGROUND: This study determined the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of pediatricians and pediatric residents regarding issues of ethics, professional education, clinical ethical principles, and consent they encounter in health service delivery.
METHODS: Participants in the study were 134 pediatricians and pediatric residents from three hospitals in Ankara, Turkey. Participants were asked questions regarding their sociodemographic characteristics, their knowledge and views of ethics and ethical education, whether they had ever encountered an ethical problem, their beliefs about obtaining consent from pediatric patients and their families, and case-based questions. All data were collected and evaluated.
RESULTS: Of the participants in the study, 82 (61.2%) were residents, 41 (30.6%) were pediatricians, and 11 (8.2%) were faculty lecturers. The data revealed that 10% of the pediatricians and pediatric residents received ethical education, apart from medical ethics/deontology education at medical school, and 90.3% required further education on children and ethical problems. It was determined that 89% of residents and 78% of pediatricians needed help with the ethical problems they encountered during the diagnostic and treatment processes. Overall, 65.7% of the participants stated that the ethical problems they encountered affected the efficiency of health service delivery. It was observed that residents were more affected by ethical issues than pediatricians were. The present study revealed that pediatric residents and pediatricians need ethics education and there is a need to establish ethics counseling centers in hospitals. There is also a need for further studies in pediatrics and ethics.

The geographically inequitable distribution of physicians has long posed a serious social problem in Japan. The government tackled this problem by establishing and managing Jichi Medical University (JMU) and regional quotas (RQs) for medical schools. JMU/RQs recruit local students who hope to work as physicians in rural areas, educate them for 6 years without tuition (JMU) or with scholarship (RQs), and after graduation, assign them to their home prefectures for 9 years, including 4-6 years of rural service. JMU/RQs entrants now occupy 11.6% of all medical school entrants. While JMU/RQs have been shown to be highly effective in securing physicians for rural areas, ethical issues related to these policies have been raised, such as whether the government truly needs to implement these policies using tax money, and whether it is acceptable to limit the personal freedoms of the physicians. In this paper, we discuss these issues from the perspectives of social justice, utilitarianism, luck egalitarianism, liberty, medical professionalism and consistency with national health insurance and the Japanese Constitution. We conclude that JMU/RQs are necessary and ethically valid policies, and also propose some institutional improvements to better secure the integrity and maturity of these systems.

Ethical and professional dilemmas are part of the day-to-day practice of medicine, including within dermatopathology (e.g., ethical implications of self-referring skin biopsies for pathology interpretation). There is a need for teaching aids that dermatology educators can easily access to help provide ethics education.
We held an hour-long, faculty-facilitated, interactive, virtual discussion about ethical issues in dermatopathology. The session followed a structured, case-based format. We administered anonymous online feedback surveys after the session and used the Wilcoxon signed rank test to compare participants\' before and after responses.
Seventy-two individuals from two academic institutions participated in the session. We collected 35 total responses (49%) from dermatology residents (n = 15), dermatology faculty (n = 14), medical students (n = 2), and other providers and learners (n = 4). Feedback was largely positive, with 21 attendees (60%) indicating they learned a few things and 11 (31%) indicating they learned a great deal. Additionally, 32 participants (91%) indicated they would recommend the session to a colleague. Our analysis showed that attendees had a greater self-perceived level of achievement for each of our three objectives after the session.
This dermatoethics session is structured so as to be easily shared, deployed, and built on by other institutions. We hope that other institutions will use our materials and results to improve upon the foundation presented here and that this framework will be used by other medical specialties seeking to foster ethics education in their training programs.

暂无摘要。

This paper is a clinical ethics case study which sheds light on several important dilemmas which arise in providing care to patients from cultures with non-individualistic conceptions of autonomy. Medical professionals face a difficult challenge in determining how to respond when families of patients ask that patients not be informed of bad medical news. These requests are often made for cultural reasons, by families seeking to protect patients. In these cases, the right that patients have to their own medical information in order to make autonomous decisions is in tension with the possibility that patients could hold values that require limiting their autonomy with regard to medical information disclosure, often based on the idea that family should take on difficult decision-making as an act of care. We describe one such case, of an 83-year old Russian woman whose husband requested she not be informed of a new cancer diagnosis. The appropriate response to this request was to ask the patient about her values separately, without disclosing any medical information until her values were clear. This patient indicated she wanted the care team to uphold her husband\'s request. This response makes the importance of determining a patient\'s values before moving forward with disclosure clear: she would not have wanted to be informed of her cancer. We describe our conversation strategy, which allowed value exploration without disclosure and highlighted that the obligation to respect a patient\'s autonomy sometimes includes an obligation to allow a patient to choose to limit their own autonomy. This case also highlights that this kind of conversation prioritizes the patient\'s values rather than the family\'s or care team\'s, centering patients in the way that is ethically appropriate.

The demand for liver transplants continues to far exceed the number of available viable donor organs; hence, it is of utmost importance to determine those individuals who are best able to care for these valuable, limited resources as potential recipients. At the same time, psychiatric comorbidity is common in the course of end-stage liver disease and can be mutually complicating. This article focuses on liver transplant candidacy from a psychiatric perspective, using illustrative cases to underscore the foundational facets of medical ethics that serve as the guide to these complex medical and ethical decisions.

The centrality of trust in traditional doctor-patient relationships has been criticized as inordinately paternalistic, yet in today\'s discussions about medical ethics-mostly in response to disruptive innovation in healthcare-trust reappears as an asset to enable empowerment. To turn away from paternalistic trust-based doctor-patient relationships and to arrive at an empowerment-based medical model, increasing reference is made to the importance of nurturing trust in technologies that are supposed to bring that empowerment. In this article we stimulate discussion about why the move towards patient empowerment may not be able to keep clear of the criticism of trust in traditional patient-doctor relationships. First, we explore how such a shift in trust dynamics might corrode patient empowerment in the name of patient empowerment. Second, we examine how a translocation of trust may at best push the \"trust issue\" elsewhere and at worst make it harder to evaluate trustworthiness.

The dominant model for bioethical inquiry taught in medical schools is that of principlism. The heritage of this methodology can be traced to the Enlightenment project of generating a universalizable justification for normative morality arising from within the individual, rational agent. This project has been criticized by Alasdair MacIntyre who suggests that its failure has resulted in a fragmented and incoherent contemporary ethical framework characterized by fundamental intractability in moral debate. This incoherence implicates principlist conceptions of bioethics. Medical ethics as practiced, though, is partially in keeping with teleological alternatives to principlism. Nonetheless, the hegemony of principlism threatens to harm the practice of good medicine whenever it is used to provide justification for the sanction or prohibition of practices, despite not being equipped to grant moral authority to such justifications. An example of this failure and its resulting harm is expressed in the growing obsolescence of living donor liver transplantation.

暂无摘要。