PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Encyclopedia of Bioethics”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

13 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1997

The heterogeneity of clinical ethics: the state of the field as reflected in the Encyclopedia of Bioethics.

The 1995 Encyclopedia of Bioethics is an almost complete reworking of the original 1978 edition, due to the expanding nature of the field. The following article focuses on how the second edition of the Encyclopedia deals with the topic of "clinical ethics" and three related topics: "nursing ethics", "trust", and "conflict of interest". We assess their relevance to the current developments in these fields and the Encyclopedia's usefulness as a resource to ethics consultants, researchers and clinicians. We emphasize the heterogeneity of clinical ethics as a still new and evolving field.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed2004

Informing the patient about a fatal disease: from paternalism to autonomy--the Jewish view.

Until the late 20th century, withholding a fatal diagnosis functioned as a paradigm for sharing other medical information with patients. The obligation of confidentiality was emphasized and disclosure was ignored. Ethicists perceived the doctor-patient relationship as oriented to therapy, reassurance, and avoiding harm. Physicians were to provide lies and truth instrumentally only insofar as they aided therapy (Jameton, A. Information disclosure. Ethical issues. In Encyclopedia of Bioethics. Revised Ed.; Reich, T.N.T., Ed.; MacMillan: New York, 1995; Vol. 3, 1225-1232). This was the era of paternalism. Since the 1960s, opinion on the role of disclosure was changed rapidly in the United States stimulated by the patient's rights movement and the rise of bioethics. The current climate supports honest and complete disclosure of medical information. In 1972, the Board of Trustees of the American Hospital Association affirmed A Patient's Bill of Rights, which states that the patient has the right to obtain from his physician complete current information concerning his diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis in terms the patient can be reasonably expected to understand (Lee, A.L.; Jacobs, G. Workshop airs patient's rights. Hospitals 1973, 47, 39-43). Bioethicists now favor full disclosure as a means of respecting patient autonomy (Katz, J. The Silent World of Doctor and Patient; Free Press: New York, 1984). The American College of Physician Ethics Manual states that disclosure to patients is a fundamental ethical requirement (American College of Physicians. American College of Physicians Ethics Manual, 3rd Ed. Ann. Intern. Med. 1992, 117, 947-960). The era of patient autonomy ended the traditional pattern of withholding information, which was characteristic of the previous era of paternalism. The Jewish view toward full disclosure of a fatal illness to a patient and especially a patient who is terminally ill is in general a negative one because of the fear that the patient may give up hope, suffer severe mental anguish (tiruf hadaat), become despondent, and die sooner than otherwise. Shortening a patient's life is strictly forbidden because Judaism espouses the concept that God given life is sacred, even only a short period thereof. Disclosure should be couched in the context of optimism. The most positive outlook should be imparted to the patient. Disclosure must be imparted with compassion, sensitivity and hope thus giving the patient an opportunity to "set his house in order" and recite the confessional penitent prayer known as viduy.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1994

The word "bioethics": its birth and the legacies of those who shaped it.

Extensive historical sleuthing reveals that the word "bioethics" and the field of study it names experienced, in 1970/1971, a "bilocated birth" in Madison, Wisconsin, and in Washington, D.C. Van Rensselaer Potter, at the University of Wisconsin first coined the term; and André Hellegers, at Georgetown University, at the very least, latched onto the already-existing word "bioethics" and first used it in an institutional way to designate the focused area of inquiry that became an academic field of learning and a movement regarding public policy and the life sciences. A further comparison of the Potter and the Hellegers/Georgetown understandings of bioethics and the relative acceptance of the two views will appear in the March 1995 issue of this journal.

Bioethics↗