暂无摘要。

Background: Little is known about how young men who have committed sexual assault might acknowledge wrongdoing and eventually change and make amends. There are practical barriers to seeking the real redemption stories of perpetrators.Objective: To explore hypothetical pathways to young men\'s accountability-taking and amends (i.e. redemption) after perpetration of sexual assault.Method: In a pre-registered, qualitative story completion study, we presented heterosexual, cisgender college men (N = 54) with a date-based sexual assault story written by a fictional male perpetrator. Participants were prompted to complete the story so that the protagonist, who initially denies wrongdoing, eventually changes and becomes a violence prevention advocate.Results: A thematic analysis of the redemption stories revealed that this study\'s speculative task was a challenging one. Half of the stories did not provide an explanation for how the perpetrator was able to acknowledge wrongdoing. Overall, individualistic themes (e.g. he introspected) were more common than relational, community, or societal facilitators of redemption.Conclusions: Without infrastructure for accountability-taking and repair, or narrative exemplars to draw from in public life, it is difficult to envision redemption from violence. Rare gender-based, structurally attuned analyses of sexual violence in the stories point the way towards a more transformative vision of redemption.
In this qualitative story completion study, college men wrote the redemption story of a fictional sexual assault perpetrator.Men had difficulty explaining how the perpetrator would acknowledge wrongdoing.Redemption themes tended to be individualistic versus rooted in community.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to understand the experiences of young men with a diagnosis of testicular cancer (TC) using a narrative approach, with the intention of informing models of care and support in clinical services.
METHODS: TC patients were recruited to participate in one of four focus groups examining their lived experiences from diagnosis. Focus groups were recorded and transcribed and analyzed using a narrative approach.
RESULTS: A total of 4 focus groups were held from March to May 2019, involving 21 participants. Participants were currently on treatment (n = 2), < 2 years from treatment completion (n = 7), or > 2 years from treatment completion (n = 12). Two overarching meta-themes were identified: Negotiating Identity (comprising \"recovery, repair and control\"; \"breaking the news\"; \"threats to fertility and virility\"; \"multiple masculinities\") and Needing to Adjust (comprising \"trauma and post-traumatic growth\"; \"facing vulnerability\"; \"managing to cope\"; \"secrecy vs. privacy\"). Shared themes relating to environments for support, conversations about cancer, and time stress were also identified.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the significant cure rates for testicular cancer, the psychosocial needs of patients diagnosed with TC are paramount and potentially long-lasting. Improved clinical care for these patients includes exploration of both physical and psychosocial concerns over multiple timepoints. Opportunities for peer support and mentorship may be essential to support these vulnerable patients.

BACKGROUND: The quality of hospital care, especially surgery, is traditionally assessed using indicators derived from healthcare databases or safety indicators. Given the growing importance of placing the patient at the heart of care evaluation, the use of questionnaires such as the Patient-Reported Experience Measures and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures has become widespread in recent years. However, these tools-addressing factors such as satisfaction, pain management or wait times-only imperfectly reflect the patient\'s experience, and all such attempts at patient-centred care quality assessment rely on questions or indicators defined in advance by healthcare providers and health authorities. A biopsychosocial model may allow to better understand the patient experience and to improve care pathways. This study seeks to construct a narrative of the bariatric surgical care journey with instruments from narrative inquiry, propose a metanarrative that can serve as a basis for more sophisticated and reliable patient-focused care quality models and define indicators linked to patients\' feelings and stories.
METHODS: To achieve these aims, 16 bariatric surgical patients at the hospital of Créteil, France (Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil), will be included and interviewed once before and twice after surgery, at months 3 and 6. Narratives collected will be used to construct a metanarrative intended to encompass all possible narratives. This metanarrative may ultimately inform new patient care quality indicators, furthering care focused on patients and tailored to their needs and predispositions.
BACKGROUND: The study is funded by the Group of Clinical Research and Innovation in Île-de-France and was approved by CPP SUD-EST VI Clermont-Ferrand (France) Research Ethics Committee. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. The patient associations will be approached for the dissemination of the study results.
BACKGROUND: NCT05092659.

How do national stories shape voter behavior? Do they affect all voters equally, or are some groups more influenced by these narratives? This article examines the impact of \"boundary national stories,\" which highlight clear distinctions between \"us\" and \"them\" in national identity, on voting patterns for populist radical right parties (PRRPs). Using original representative election surveys conducted in four Western democracies, we find that voters who embrace a Boundary national story are more likely to vote for Populist Radical Right Parties (PRRPs) than those who do not hold such stories, and that the electoral effect of such stories is more salient for marginalized groups in society. Our findings demonstrate that, while national stories can foster cohesion, they can also drive us apart and polarize our politics. We conclude by discussing the broader implications of these findings for the study of populism in political science.

This symposium collection of twelve narratives from individuals who experienced clinical ethics consultations provides perspectives from a group that has not been adequately explored in the bioethics literature. The authors represent a variety of stakeholders who received ethics consultations: healthcare providers and family members. This commentary will focus on three themes addressed in the different narrative accounts: the reasons for requesting an ethics consultation; the expectations of the narrators from the consultation; and the conclusions the authors drew from their experience of the ethics consultation.

This commentary discusses 12 stories about receiving ethics consultation in hospitals. Five stories are by physicians, three by nurses, and four by family members; three of the writers have training in bioethics. Some writers requested the consultation, others experienced the consultation as an imposition forced upon them, and in two cases, the story is about the absence of any consultation service. Three types of narrative are found to structure the stories: the genuine dilemma narrative, the institutional intransigence narrative, and the relational care narrative. Throughout, the question is what makes for a valuable consultation, and the general answer is whether consultation enables the development of mutually supportive relationships.

This commentary reflects on twelve stories of participants in clinical ethics consultations from the perspective of family members, some of whom are ethics consultants, and healthcare professionals. Together they reveal expectations of ethics consultations and suggest descriptions of the service. Some common themes emerge, including the role of the clinical ethics consultant in navigating complex situations, assuring all stake-holder voices are heard, attending to moral distress, addressing issues that seem beyond medical practice, and being accessible. They are almost uniformly positive about the experience, with criticism primarily about lack of access to the service.

暂无摘要。

This symposium includes twelve personal narratives from those who have received clinical ethics consultation (CEC) services as a healthcare provider, patient, family member, or patient advocate. Three commentaries on these narratives are also included, authored by experts and scholars in bioethics, healthcare ethics consultation and certification, narrative medicine, and policy. The goal of this symposium is to call attention to the experiences of people who have received clinical ethics consultation (CEC) services as a healthcare provider, patient, family member, or patient advocate.