Colleen Gallagher

During a clinical ethics fellow’s first week of independent supervised service, two unhoused patients on the same floor were resisting the medical team’s recommendations to discharge. In the team’s view, both were medically stable and no longer required hospitalization in an acute setting. The medical team suspected malingering for both. The social worker and case manager had employed their usual means of gentle persuasion and eliminating psychosocial barriers to no avail. Rather than call the police, the attending physician, social worker, and case manager decided to call ethics. These cases lead the fledgling fellow to consider the appropriate role for ethicists in difficult discharge cases. The article analyzes each case, evaluates their similarities and differences in the context of suspected malingering, and comments on ethical issues surrounding cases of suspected malingering. Finally, I reflect on the value and importance of developing and maintaining epistemic and professional independence.

At the 2022 Clinical Ethics Unconference, the authors perceived a significant lack of racial and ethnic diversity, which was consistent with their experiences in other clinical ethics settings. As a result, they convened a working group to address the pervasive lack of diversity present in the field of clinical ethics and to propose strategies to increase the representation of people from racial and ethnic minority populations. This article identifies the harms associated with the lack of diversity in the healthcare setting and translates these to the field of clinical ethics. The article then proposes a framework that may be used to help diversify the field of clinical ethics. Specifically, the authors identify existing barriers to appropriate diversity, actionable steps to increase diversity, and tools the field can utilize to systematically assess its progress with respect to achieving diversity.

La nueva enfermedad del coronavirus de 2019 (Covid-19), producida por el coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio Agudo Severo 2 (SARS-CoV-2), es una pandemia que está creando una creciente crisis sanitaria mundial, dada su novedad, su alcance y sus inicialmente limitadas opciones de tratamiento eficaz. En efecto, se sabe poco acerca de las intervenciones no farmacéuticas óptimas para evitar la morbilidad y mortalidad causadas por él, y también se conoce poco sobre la rentabilidad y aspectos éticos de dichas intervenciones. Por lo tanto, éste es el primer análisis ético y de rentabilidad de las medidas de contención del Covid-19 que se conoce (así como de las medidas de cuarentena de la población para cualquier pandemia en particular), con el fin de ayudar a los sistemas de salud y a los gobiernos a garantizar la atención clínica más rentable que pueda proporcionarse equitativamente al mayor número posible de pacientes, durante esta pandemia y en las futuras crisis mundiales que sean similares. Este análisis utilizó la metodología adoptada por los Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC), cifras comúnmente aceptadas como entradas, y los supuestos mínimos tanto extremos como del mundo real para proporcionar los resultados más sólidos y confiables posibles. El análisis de costos indicó que en los escenarios extremos, o en el mejor de los casos para las medidas de contención del Covid-19 durante la cuarentena de la población, hay una relación de costo-efectividad de $154.86 millones de dólares gastados por cada muerte evitada, y un costo neto de $1.92 billones a nivel mundial. En el mundo real, esta intervención tiene una proporción de 2,520 millones de dólares gastados por cada muerte evitada y un costo neto de 1,99 billones de dólares. La ética del contrato social personalista, tal y como se articula en el popular sistema ético de derechos y deberes de las Naciones Unidas, pone de manifiesto la especial preocupación por el hecho de que estos confinamientos pueden derivar en injusticias poco éticas perpetuadas por los Estados, de manera que socavan las vidas y las libertades individuales, al tiempo que afectan de manera des- proporcionada a las comunidades de menores ingresos, especialmente a las minorías raciales. Este estudio sugiere, por tanto, que la práctica prevalente de la cuarentena entre la población, en comparación con las precauciones de tipo estándar y las intervenciones más específicas, puede proporcionar un beneficio neto inadecuado por su costo financiero y ético. En un momento de escasez mundial, que pone a prueba la capacidad de los sistemas sanitarios para detectar y atender adecuadamente a los pacientes con Covid-19, especialmente en los países en desarrollo y en las comunidades desatendidas, este estudio respalda que se dediquen menos recursos a intervenciones con una relación costo- beneficio poco clara, y más recursos a intervenciones más asequibles, éticas y equitativas, con mayores pruebas de sus beneficios netos para salvar vidas.

The biopsychosocial model is characterized by the systematic consideration of biological, psychological, and social factors and their complex interactions in understanding health, illness, and health care delivery. This model opposes the biomedical model, which is the foundation of most current clinical practice. In the biomedical model, quest for evidence based medicine, the patient is reduced to molecules, genes, organelles, systems, diseases, etc. This reduction has brought great advances in medicine, but it lacks a holistic view of the person. To solve the problem, we propose an early team based approach where the primary care physician leads a group of people that can help her/him address the psychosocial issues while she/he attends to the biomedical issues. This article addresses one case where the clinical ethicist facilitating a team based biopsychosocial model for the care of a patient worked as a bridge between the primary team, the critical care team, and the psychosocial team to advance the argument that good communication among the groups can lead to a true biopsychosocial model where the collaboration of the social worker, psychologist, chaplain, ethicist and the different medical teams can improve the overall patient experience.

Pastoral care ministers and social workers are involved in providing care and assistance to people facing life changes and crises. One of the most challenging aspects of their work is dealing with people who are dying and those who care for them. This study examined this experience through interviews with experienced professionals that focused on their experience and the preparation they thought necessary for newcomers to the field. The study found that even those working in community settings spent considerable time on problems that were directly or indirectly related to end of life care. It also confirmed that experienced professionals believed that more and different educational experiences would have better prepared them for providing end-of-life care. This was especially true for those working in community settings. While attention has been paid to the educational needs of doctors and nurses in this field, pastoral care workers and social workers have been neglected. ;The interviews led to the development of a model of basic skills and knowledge needed for this work. The model is presented here. Suggestions for future education and training include increasing the amount of time for internships and the inclusion of experience working or observing in health care settings and formal courses related to medical and ethical issues and ethical decision making be required prior to obtaining the degree or credential in the chosen profession

This case study details a request from a patient family member who calls our service without an articulated ethical dilemma. The issue that arose involved the conflict between continuing further medical interventions versus transitioning to supportive or palliative care and transferring the patient home. Beyond the resolution of the ethical dilemma, this narrative illustrates an approach to ethics consultation that seeks practical resolution of ethical dilemmas in alignment with patient goals and values. Importantly, the family’s suffering is addressed through a relationship driven, humanistic approach that incorporates elements of compassion, empathy and dialog.

Abstract   Medical futility is commonly understood as treatment that would not provide for any meaningful benefit for the patient. While the medical facts will help to determine what is medically appropriate, it is often difficult for patients, families, surrogate decision-makers and healthcare providers to navigate these difficult situations. Often communication breaks down between those involved or reaches an impasse. This paper presents a set of practical strategies for dealing with cases of perceived medical futility at a major cancer center. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-8 DOI 10.1007/s10730-011-9168-3 Authors Colleen M. Gallagher, Section for Integrated Ethics in Cancer Care, Unit 1430, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, P.O. Box 301402, Houston, TX 77230-1402, USA Ryan F. Holmes, St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USA Journal HEC Forum Online ISSN 1572-8498 Print ISSN 0956-2737.