Aline Albuquerque

This paper aims to contribute to a deeper reflection on intercultural conflicts within the scope of bioethics, and to point out the problem of using human rights as a theoretical normative mediator of the conflicts in bioethics that bear elements of interculturalism. The methodological steps adopted in this inquiry were the analysis of the concept of intercultural conflict in bioethics, from the perception developed by Colectivo Amani; the study of human rights as tools of the culture of human beings, based on Bauman's theories; and the investigation of the tools that human rights offer so as to solve intercultural conflicts in bioethics. I conclude that intercultural bioethics must incorporate in its prescriptive and descriptive tasks, norms and institutions of human rights that ensure the participation and social integration of individuals from communities that are in cultural conflict. Such measures will act as instruments for the solution of intercultural conflicts.

Background Clinical empathy is an essential part of healthcare, and patient-centered care models require clinical empathy to be established. Despite this, little is known about its measurement in the neonatal scenario. Research Aim To measure clinical empathy in health professionals who work with medium and high-risk neonates and build a construct of this empathy. Research Design Single-center survey study. Participants and Research Context The Jefferson Scale of Empathy for Health Professionals questionnaire was applied to health professionals who work in an intensive care unit and a medium-risk unit, in Brazil. Analysis was done using descriptive statistics and a factor analysis model, to build the construct of empathy. Overall empathy was calculated, and the domains’ punctuations were analyzed and compared to the maximum punctuation possible. The study followed the STROBE checklist. Ethical Considerations This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the institution. All participants signed the informed consent form. Participants’ confidentiality and anonymity were protected. Findings Median empathy was 117 (IQR 113–124). The domain of Walking in the Patient’s Shoes had lower scores and represented 77.6% of the maximum punctuation possible. The factor analysis included three factors named Understanding, Experiences, and Treatment, and Emotional Relationships, explaining 64.3% of the overall variance. The domain Walking in the Patient’s Shoes was not included in the model. Conclusions In this scenario, clinical empathy should improve. There is a need to improve the domain of Walking in the Patient’s Shoes, in this case, the neonate, and provide more empathic care to them.

The process of medicalization has an unquestionable impact on everyday life, particularly on the populations of the countries that are large consumer markets of medicines and health resources. The present study consists of theoretical research which aims to analyze the interface between medicalization and human rights of patients. It draws the conclusion that the process of medicalization has a direct impact on the exercise of human rights by the patients. In addition, it verifies that the medicalization process guided by the logic of market is strong and difficult to restrain, therefore, it is imperative that the State adopts a law on patients’ human rights.