Joan McCarthy

To prevent and reduce the transmission of the coronavirus to vulnerable populations, the World Health Organization recommended the restriction of visitors to nursing homes. It was recognised that such restrictions could have profound impact on residents and their families. Nonetheless, these measures were strictly imposed over a prolonged period in many countries; impeding families from remaining involved in their relatives’ care and diluting the meaningful connections for residents with society. It is timely to explore the impact of public health measures on people living in nursing homes from an ethical perspective. In order to foreground the ethical dimensions of the implications of visitor restrictions in nursing homes, we compiled an ethical case that reflects some recent experiences of nursing homes residents and their families, in the Irish Republic. We describe a series of events encountered by a woman and her family during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020 and we deploy an ethical decision-making tool to guide and structure our analysis. Our case analysis draws attention to ethical principles that are relevant to explicating the ethical duties and obligations that arise in relation to the interests, well-being, and safety of residents and their families, as well as nursing home staff and the wider community during a pandemic. These include the right of autonomy, trust, minimising harm, and proportionality. We conclude that a number of different strategies should be adopted by nursing homes and relevant regulatory bodies. This includes honest, regular communication between the nursing home staff, the resident and their family. Central to communications is the resident’s wishes, their current clinical status and the all-important wider public health obligations. National strategies include mass vaccination, the timely provision of guidance documents and interventions from regulatory bodies that are patient-centred, adaptable, and cost effective.

Aim: The aim of this review is to examine the ways in which the concept of moral distress has been delineated and deployed in the argument-based nursing ethics literature. It adds to what we already know about moral distress from reviews of the qualitative and quantitative research. Data sources: CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Knowledge, EMBASE, Academic Search Complete, PsycInfo, Philosophers’ Index and Socindex. Review methods: A total of 20 argument-based articles published between January 1984 and December 2013 were analysed. Results: We found that like the empirical literature, most authors in this review draw on Jameton’s original definition and describe moral distress in psychological–emotional–physiological terms. They also agree that moral distress is linked to the presence of some kind of constraint on nurses’ moral agency, and that it is best understood as a two-staged process that can intensify over time. There is also consensus that moral distress has an important normative meaning, although different views concerning the normative meaning of moral distress are expressed. Finally, the authors generally agree that moral distress arises from a number of different sources and that it (mostly) affects negatively on nurses’ personal and professional lives and, ultimately, harms patients. However, despite this consensus, many authors take issue with the way in which moral distress is conceptualized and operationalized. Moreover, while some worry that identifying nurses as a group of health professionals whose voices are ignored or marginalized might disempower nurses and encourage them to avoid their moral responsibilities, others take situations involving moral distress as indicative of more fundamental, structural inequities at the heart of contemporary healthcare provision. Conclusion: We conclude that research on moral distress in nursing is timely and important because it highlights the specifically moral labour of nurses. However, we suggest that significant concerns about the conceptual fuzziness and operationalization of moral distress also flag the need to proceed with caution.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the need for hospital clinical ethics committees by studying the frequency with which ethical dilemmas arose, the perceived adequacy of the process of their resolution, and the teaching and training of staff in medical ethics. DESIGN: Interviews with individuals and three multidisciplinary teams; questionnaire to randomly selected individuals. SETTING: Two major London children's hospitals. RESULTS: Ethical dilemmas arose frequently but were resolved in a relatively unstructured fashion. Ethical concerns included: the validity of consent for investigations and treatment; lack of children's involvement in consent; initiation of heroic or futile treatments; resource allocation. Staff expressed the need for a forum which would provide consultation on ethical issues, develop guidelines for good ethical practice, undertake teaching and training, and provide ethical reflection outside the acute clinical setting. CONCLUSION: Multidisciplinary, accountable and audited clinical ethics committees with predominantly advisory, practice development and educational roles could provide a valuable contribution to UK clinical practice and perhaps in other countries that have not developed hospital clinical ethics committees

The Covid‐19 pandemic has highlighted many of the difficult ethical issues that health care professionals confront in caring for patients and families. The decisions such workers face on the front lines are fraught with uncertainty for all stakeholders. Our focus is on the implications for nurses, who are the largest global health care workforce but whose perspectives are not always fully considered. This essay discusses three overarching ethical issues that create a myriad of concerns and will likely affect nurses globally in unique ways: the safety of nurses, patients, colleagues, and families; the allocation of scarce resources; and the changing nature of nurses’ relationships with patients and families. We urge policy‐makers to ensure that nurses’ voices and perspectives are integrated into both local and global decision‐making so as to minimize the structural injustices many nurses have faced to date. Finally, we urge nurses to seek sources of support throughout this pandemic.

The Republic of Ireland has some of the most restrictive abortion legislation in the world which grants to the ‘unborn’ an equal right to life to that of the pregnant woman. This article outlines recent developments in the public discourse on abortion in Ireland and explains the particular cultural and religious context that informs the ethical case for access to abortion services. Our perspective rests on respect for two very familiar moral principles – autonomy and justice – which are at the centre of social and democratic societies around the world. This article explains the context for the deployment of these concepts in order to support the claim that the current legislation and its operationalisation in clinical practice poses serious risks to the health, lives and well-being of pregnant women, tramples on their autonomy rights and requires of them a self-sacrifice that is unreasonable and unjust.

In the last three decades, considerable theoretical and empirical research has been undertaken on the topic of moral distress among health professionals. Understood as a psychological and emotional response to the experience of moral wrongdoing, there is evidence to suggest that—if unaddressed—it contributes to staff demoralization, desensitization and burnout and, ultimately, to lower standards of patient safety and quality of care. However, more recently, the concept of moral distress has been subjected to important criticisms. Specifically, some authors argue that the standard account of moral distress elucidated by Jameton :542–551, 1984) does not refer to a discrete phenomenon and/or that it is not sufficiently broad and that this makes measuring its prevalence among health professionals, and other groups of workers, difficult if not impossible. In this paper, we defend the standard account of moral distress. We understand it as a concept that draws attention to the social, political and contextual determinants of moral agency and brings the emotional landscape of the moral realm to the fore. Given the increasing pressure on health professionals worldwide to meet efficiency, financial and corporate targets and reported adverse effects of these for the quality and safety of patient care, we believe that further empirical research that deploys the standard account moral distress is timely and important.

Background: Written reflections on practice are frequently requirements of nursing curricula. They are widely accepted as necessary for improving critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Faculty, are expected to review reflections and provide feedback that helps professional development and facilitates good practice. It is less clear what the actions of nurse educators should be when ethical infractions are revealed in the narratives. Objectives: We had two aims: 1) To combine insights from a literature review of empirical and theoretical research related to responding to ethical issues revealed in student reflections with our experiences reviewing the reflections of undergraduate nursing and midwifery students, and 2) to construct and analyze a hybrid case from these insights in order to develop guidelines for nurse educators. Research Design: A literature review was conducted using CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SocINDEX and ERIC databases and pertinent key words. A hybrid case was constructed of commonly encountered ethical issues using insights from the literature review and the authors’ experiences. The case was analyzed by combining Beauchamp and Childress’ principlist approach with Campbell and McCarthy’s ethical decision-making tool (Table 1). Participants and Research Context: No human participants Findings: A gap in the literature exists related to addressing ethical issues revealed in student practice reflections. However, a combination of insights from the literature and the authors’ experiences facilitated the development of a hybrid case. Subsequent case analysis facilitated the development of a series of guidelines that can be utilized to address a range of issues commonly emerging in the reflections of nursing students during practice experiences. Discussion: A number of recommendations and guidelines are provided to enable the safeguarding of students and staff and support them in practicing ethically. Conclusion: Structured ethical analysis of a constructed hybrid reflection of commonly revealed ethical issues was useful in developing guidelines for educators.

Although clinical ethics support services are becoming increasingly prevalent in Europe and North America, they remain an uncommon feature of the Irish healthcare system and Irish health professionals lack formal support when faced with ethically challenging cases. We have developed a variant on existing clinical ethics decision-making tools which is designed to build capacity and confidence amongst Irish practitioners and enable them to confront challenging situations in the absence of any dedicated support structure. The tool provided below follows a transparent stepwise procedure which avoids an overcomplicated analysis while remaining sensitive to the complexity of the issues addressed. The novelty of the tool lies in the explicit association it makes between each step in the process and one or more responsibilities based on established norms of ethical decision-making in the public domain.

This paper makes the case for a pluralist, contextualist view of nursing ethics. In defending this view, I briefly outline two current perspectives of nursing ethics – the Traditional View and the Theory View. I argue that the Traditional View, which casts nursing ethics as a subcategory of healthcare ethics, is problematic because it (1) fails to sufficiently acknowledge the unique nature of nursing practice; and (2) applies standard ethical frameworks such as principlism to moral problems which tend to alienate or undermine nursing ethical concerns. Alternatively, the Theory View, which aims to build an independent and comprehensive theory of nursing ethics, is also found wanting because it (1) fails to sufficiently acknowledge the heterogeneous nature of nursing practices; (2) overemphasizes the differences and undervalues the similarities between nurses and other health professionals; and (3) assumes that one ethical framework can be meaningfully applied across diverse moral problems and contexts.My alternative, is to argue that nursing ethics inquiry should take a pluralist and critical stance towards available ethical frameworks and the negotiation of the ethical realm. On this view, the search for moral consensus or a unique ethical framework for nursing is replaced by the task of working strategically with multiple frameworks in order to expand the moral agency of nurses and empower them to positively engage with moral uncertainty as an inevitable feature of living a moral life. I conclude by indicating some of the implications that this has for the teaching of nursing ethics.

Moral distress has received much attention in the international nursing literature in recent years. In this article, we describe the evolution of the concept of moral distress among nursing theorists from its initial delineation by the philosopher Jameton to its subsequent deployment as an umbrella concept describing the impact of moral constraints on health professionals and the patients for whom they care. The article raises worries about the way in which the concept of moral distress has been portrayed in some nursing research and expresses concern about the fact that research, so far, has been largely confined to determining the prevalence of experiences of moral distress among nurses. We conclude by proposing a reconsideration, possible reconstruction and multidisciplinary approach to understanding the experiences of all health professionals who have to make difficult moral judgements and decisions in complex situations

This article briefly outlines some of the key problems with the way in which the moral realm has traditionally been understood and analysed. I propose two alternative views of what is morally interesting and applicable to nursing practice and I indicate that instability has its upsides. I begin with a moral tale – a 'Good Samaritan' story – which raises fairly usual questions about the nature of morality but also the more philosophically fundamental question about the relationship between subjectivity and moral agency. I then consider this relationship from the perspectives of two twentieth century philosophers: Emmanuel Levinas and Michel Foucault. Levinas' basic point is that the experience of ethical subjectivity is made possible through others: the demand to respond to the existence of others is the basic social structure that precedes individual freedom. If Levinas posits intersubjectivity as a fundamental or primitive feature of the moral realm, Foucault poses an even more basic question: how have moral subjects and relations of obligation been constituted? The aim of ethical inquiry, for Foucault, is to describe the network of discourses, institutions, relations, and practices through which certain kinds of subjects are constituted and constitute themselves, e.g. as a kind of person who can act morally. Finally, I consider some recent research in philosophy of nursing which illustrates how Levinasian and/or Foucauldian perspectives can deepen understanding of nurses' moral practices, specifically, the work of Norwegian public health nurses, Canadian pediatric nurses, and Irish midwives. I suggest that in spite of the instability of morality in general and the particular ethical challenges that face nurses, there are grounds for hope and possible strategies for living in unstable times.

Background: A high prevalence of cognitive impairment and frailty complicates the feasibility of advance care planning in the long-term-care population. Research aim: To identify challenges in implementing the ‘Let Me Decide’ advance care planning programme in long-term-care. Research design: This feasibility study had two phases: (1) staff education on advance care planning and (2) structured advance care planning by staff with residents and families. Participants and research context: long-term-care residents in two nursing homes and one community hospital. Ethical considerations: The local research ethics committee granted ethical approval. Findings: Following implementation, over 50% of all residents had completed some form of end-of-life care plan. Of the 70 residents who died in the post-implementation period, 14% had no care plan, 10% (with capacity) completed an advance care directive and lacking such capacity, 76% had an end-of-life care plan completed for them by the medical team, following discussions with the resident (if able) and family. The considerable logistical challenge of releasing staff for training triggered development of an e-learning programme to facilitate training. Discussion: The challenges encountered were largely concerned with preserving resident’s autonomy, avoiding harm and suboptimal or crisis decision-making, and ensuring residents were treated fairly through optimisation of finite resources. Conclusions: Although it may be too late for many long-term-care residents to complete their own advance care directive, the ‘ Let Me Decide’ programme includes a feasible and acceptable option for structured end-of-life care planning for residents with variable capacity to complete an advance care directive, involving discussion with the resident (to the extent they were able) and their family. While end-of-life care planning was time-consuming to deliver, nursing staff were willing to overcome this and take ownership of the programme, once the benefits in improved communication and enhanced peace of mind among all parties involved became apparent in practice.

In April 2004 the Irish Government commissioned Judge Maureen Harding Clark to compile a report to ascertain the rate of caesarean hysterectomies at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda, Republic of Ireland. The report came about as a result of complaints by midwives into questionable practices that were mainly (but not solely) attributed to one particular obstetrician. In this article we examine the findings of this Report through a feminist lens in order to explore what a feminist reading of the Report and the events that led to the inquiry will bring to light. We consider how sex and gender feature in the Lourdes case, draw attention to the deeply gendered asymmetries of power and privilege that existed between the men and women at the centre of this inquiry, and explore the impact such asymmetries had on this particular situation