E. Howe

When clinicians provide clinical care or participate in ethics consultations, they may feel exceptionally painful emotions. When they do, they may distance themselves emotionally from patients and families. This distancing may harm these parties profoundly. It is therefore critical that clinicians avoid this distancing. In this piece, I present an approach that lies outside traditional practice that clinicians may use to try to avoid and even reverse this distancing, if and when they sense that this may be occurring. This approach may also benefit patients and families. It may increase their sense that their clinicians are working with them as allies to achieve their shared medical goals.

How might clinicians best try to retain the trust of patients and family members after clinicians oppose giving a treatment? If clinicians can maintain the trust of patients and families in these situations, this may soften what may be the greatest possible loss—the death of a loved one.I discuss what clinicians seeking to retain trust should not do—namely impose their values and reason wrongly—and introduce strategies that clinicians may use to reduce both. I present five principles that clinicians can follow to try to retain trust, with examples that illustrate each. I suggest specific interventions that clinicians can make, especially when they anticipate that a patient and/or family may, in time, want a treatment that is futile.

Parents may experience profound stress when their infant is extremely premature or has exceptionally low birth weight. This article presents several approaches that clinicians and ethics consultants can use to reduce this stress when a parent is single and alone, as well as when both parents are present. Offering parents additional options, taking preventative measures, and using approaches based on recent innovations in psychotherapies are emphasized. Since the clinicians who care for these neonates may find it exceptionally stressful and may experience “burn out,” especially over time, this article also addresses what may work best for them. Finally it will discuss clinicians, who, despite their best efforts, find that caring for these infants is simply too painful to bear.

Ethics consultants’ grasp of ethical principles is ever improving. Yet, what still remains and will remain lacking is their ability to access factors that lie outside their conscious awareness and thus still effect suboptimal outcomes. This article will explore several ways in which these poor outcomes may occur. This discussion will include clinicians’ implicit biases, well-intentioned but nonetheless intrusive violations of patients’ privacy, and clinicians’ unwittingly connoting to patients and families that clinicians regard their moral values and conclusions as superior. I shall suggest several ways in which clinicians may seek to reduce these sources of bad outcomes or at least to do better when they occur.

Clinicians and patients and their families may disagree about a course of treatment, and the ensuing conflict may seem intractable. The parties may request mediation, or use mediation-based approaches, to help resolve the conflict. In the process of mediation, and at other times, parties in conflict may feel so pressured to accept a resolution that they acquiesce unwillingly—and such resolutions often unravel. In this article I investigate how “bullied acquiescence” might happen, and how to avoid it.

One of the most difficult decisions a clinician may face is when, if ever, to decline what a patient wants, based on the clinician’s own moral conscience. Regardless of what the clinician decides, the outcome may be deeply emotionally painful for both parties, and the pain may last. I will discuss this pain, how it occurs, and what we can do to try to reduce it before, during, and after a conflict arises. Approaches include explaining how we are like the patient or doctor, that no one is perfect, and that what we do is not who we are.

In this special issue of The Journal of Clinical Ethics, different views on both the ethical desirability of women delivering in hospitals or at home with midwives are discussed. What careproviders, including midwives, should recommend to mothers in regard to the place of giving birth is considered. Emotional concerns likely to be of importance to mothers, fathers, midwives, and doctors are also presented. Finally, possible optimal approaches at the levels of both policy and the bedside are suggested.

The author describes an alternative approach that careproviders may want to consider when caring for patients who request interventions that careproviders see as futile. This approach is based, in part, on findings of recent neuroimaging research. The author also provides several examples of seemingly justifiable “paternalistic omissions,” taken from articles in this issue of The Journal of Clinical Ethics (JCE). The author suggests that while careproviders should always give patients and their loved ones all potentially relevant information regarding “futile” decisions, careproviders may wish to consider, paradoxically, not giving advice in these situations, when the advice is based mostly or wholly on their own moral views, based on this same, ethical rationale.

In this issue of JCE, Baum-Baicker and Sisti present senior psychoanalysts’ views of wisdom.Although views on wisdom differ widely, there is agreement that when ethical conflicts arise, wisdom may be critical in bringing about an optimal result. Here I will present recent empirical findings on wisdom and the ways careproviders may acquire and apply it, especially in ethical conflicts. The findings are not well-known and may seem counterintuitive; I selected them, in large part, for those reasons. A core challenge may be to decide when to give patients standard care and when to make exceptions. In this issue of JCE, Baum-Baicker and Sisti discuss exceptions and Bursztajn and colleagues consider how these exceptions may be further validated as evidence-based treatments

How can clinical ethics consultants best assist patients and their family members when patients may be dying? In this introduction, I consider this concern in light of four articles that appear in this issue of The Journal of Clinical Ethics, by Jeffrey T. Berger; Mary T. White; Linying Hu, Xiuyun Yin, Xiaolei Bao, and Jin-Bao Nie; and Thaddeus Mason Pope and Melinda Hexum.Patients and family members experience extreme stress at the end of life, a high-stakes situation in which few of us have extensive experience. This stress can make us less able to process new information, cripple decision making, and even lead to long-term harm.I provide a number of practical approaches that clinical ethics consultants can use to help patients and family members in these situations, so that their decisions may reflect more what they really want and so that, after this stress has diminished, they may then do better.

In the documentary Boston Med, patients, their family members, and their careproviders agree to be filmed in real medical situations. Why would they do this? The possible answers to this question may help us to make sense of the paradoxical results of a recent study, in which patients with terminal illness ranked their careproviders highly for communication, even though the patients had failed to learn that they had a fatal illness. Based on this analysis, I offer careproviders a practical approach they can use to improve communication with patients, particularly to help patients to feel less alone. This same approach can also be applied in bioethics consultation.

Attention to the ethical concerns of healthcare aides can provide important information about patients’ needs to careproviders, improve the ethical environment of an institution, and benefit aides who suffer from bearing ethical concerns alone. All persons benefit from sharing their ethical concerns with others. Among other benefits, ethics consultation offers careproviders, caregivers, healthcare aides, patients, and patients’ loved ones an opportunity to have their concerns heard.John Fletcher tried to follow every ethics consultation with a debriefing for all participants, including patients and family members, to increase the possibility for continued healing after the conclusion of the consultation, and there are good reasons to follow this practice.