Ethical concerns in caring for persons with anorexia nervosa: content analysis of a series of documentations from ethics consultations.

BACKGROUND: Caring for patients with anorexia nervosa (AN) is associated with high levels of moral distress among healthcare professionals. The main moral conflict has been posited to be between applying coercion to prevent serious complications such as premature death and accepting treatment refusals. However, empirical evidence on this topic is scarce. METHODS: We identified all 19 documentations of ethics consultations (ECs) in the context of AN from one clinical ethics support service in Switzerland. These documentations were coded with a sequential deductive-inductive approach and the code system was interpreted in a case-based manner. Here, we present findings on patient characteristics and ethical concerns. FINDINGS: The ECs typically concerned an intensely pretreated, extremely underweight AN patient endangering herself by refusing the proposed treatment. In addition to the justifiability of coercion, frequent ethical concerns were whether further coerced treatment aimed at weight gain would be ineffective or even harmful, evidencing uncertainty about beneficence and non-maleficence and a conflict between these principles. Discussed options included harm reduction (e.g. psychotherapy without weight gain requirements) and palliation (e.g. initiating end-of-life care), the appropriateness of which were ethical concerns in themselves. Overall, nine different types of conflicts between or uncertainties regarding ethical principles were identified with a median of eight per case. CONCLUSIONS: Ethical concerns in caring for persons with AN are diverse and complex. To deal with uncertainty about and conflict between respect for autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence, healthcare professionals consider non-curative approaches. However, currently, uncertainty around general justifiability, eligibility criteria, and concrete protocols hinders their adoption.

Ethical Challenges for Plastic Surgery in Treating Internationally Adopted Children With Cleft Lip and Palate.

A large number of children with cleft lip and palate (CLP) were adopted to Sweden in the last decade, mainly from China. Most of the children arrived with unoperated palates and at later ages than earlier years. This article aims to present an overview of ethical challenges within the practice of international adoption of children with CLP from the perspective of plastic surgery in a welfare health care system. An overview of CLP treatment is presented, followed by a normative discussion and ethical analysis using the 4 principles of Beauchamp and Childress: non-maleficence, beneficence, autonomy, and justice. The following themes and subthemes were analyzed: the search for normality and the potential challenge of being adopted and having CLP-treatment autonomy of the child and future preferences, adoptive parents' expectations of plastic surgery, the journey of the adoptee and the adoptive parents; and general issues-reconstructive possibilities and consequences of CLP in the country of origin, information to the adoptive parents, health care needs, and reconstructive possibilities for children with CLP in the receiving country. Clinical implications are discussed, and suggestions for future research are provided.

What Do We Owe Our Patients? Surgeon Obligations When Patients Are Too Sick for Surgery.

As the principle of respect for patient autonomy has gained salience over the past 75 years, surgeons now struggle to resolve conflicts between autonomy and beneficence in certain clinical scenarios. One such conflict occurs when a patient desires a surgical intervention, but the surgeon concludes that the patient is "too sick for surgery" and hence would not benefit from the operation. We provide historical context for the principle of respect for patient autonomy and review recent qualitative data that demonstrate surgeons experience significant moral distress when asked to perform nonbeneficial surgery. Therefore, we sought to empower surgeons with the appropriate ethical justifications to decline to perform surgery when they believe it would be nonbeneficial or harmful to patients. We outline 4 concepts that can help surgeons engage with patients, families, and colleagues in these scenarios. First, we describe the term "futility" and explain the difficulty in precisely defining and using the term in practice. Second, we contrast patients' positive and negative rights, drawing on historical context to argue that patients have robust negative rights but limited positive rights to request nonbeneficial interventions. Third, we use the centuries-old notion of medicine as a profession to show that surgeons have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interests of their patients, including and especially when patients request interventions that are not beneficial. Finally, we draw on virtue ethics to give surgeons character-based resources for fulfilling their professional obligations to patients. We contend that surgeons owe their patients the ability to trust that they will always use their knowledge and skills for patients' benefit, even if surgeons must limit patients' autonomy in certain ways to do so.

Ethical Considerations for Acutely Injured and Future Burn Patients Who Smoke While on Home Oxygen Therapy.

Home oxygen therapy (HOT) is prescribed to patients with pulmonary dysfunction to improve survival and quality of life. However, ignition of oxygen can lead to burns with significant morbidity and mortality. Providers who routinely treat this patient population face an ethical issue: balancing the obligation to provide beneficial treatment to a patient with the responsibility to protect that patient from suffering avoidable burn injuries. A thorough review was conducted to assess the literature regarding ethical considerations involved in managing patients who have been burned while smoking on HOT and who continue to smoke. Various aspects of this problem and potential approaches to address it were analyzed with respect to 4 core ethical principles of health care: beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice. For patients who repeatedly present with burns acquired secondary to smoking while on oxygen, the authors consider it ethically unacceptable to withhold standard-of-care intervention for acute burns because refusal to treat acute burns conflicts with all 4 ethical principles. A preventive strategy would encourage a more judicious prescription of HOT, supporting the principles of nonmaleficence and beneficence. Additional preventive strategies include upstream solutions such as longitudinal patient education about smoking cessation and the risks of smoking on HOT. Physicians are tasked with the responsibility of both providing optimal care for this patient population and preventing future burn injuries. They may be able to address this challenging situation by thinking more critically about potential solutions while bearing in mind key ethical considerations and obligations.

Working experience of nurse anesthetists with beneficence for patients.

BACKGROUND: Nowadays, patients in Thailand have easier access to public health services, resulting in an increased number of patients undergoing surgery. Therefore, the Royal College of Anesthesiologists produces nurse anesthetists to reduce the shortage of anesthesiologists who can perform general anesthesia under the physician's supervision. As a result, nurse anesthetists must have the consciousness to work on the basis of ethics and professional standards. Nurse anesthetists have work experience that aims to benefit patients and make them as safe as possible. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the working experience of nurse anesthetists with beneficence for patients. METHODS: This study employed qualitative research using in-depth interviews. The sample consisted of 33 nurse anesthetists who volunteered to participate in the research project with more than ten years of work experience and worked in tertiary care hospitals. The researcher used a qualitative content analysis method.Ethical considerations: Study after approval and certification of the research project from the Human Ethics Committee of Mahidol University, and Naval Medical Department. RESULTS: The working experience of nurse anesthetists with beneficence for patients involves communicating and listening with compassion, being considerate, knowledgeable, and standard operations, team communication, and awareness of patient safety, as a productive and non-harmful work experience. DISCUSSION: Nurse anesthetists working in situations of beneficial approaches to patient care need experience in appropriate communication, professional knowledge and skills to thoroughly assess patients, pass critical information to the team, and be aware of potential risks. Make patients receive care in a more suitable and safe way. CONCLUSION: Working experience of nurse anesthetists with beneficence for patients exists with communication and listening with compassion, being considerate, communicating and forwarding the patient's necessary information to the team to be aware of abnormalities, knowledgeable and standard operations, and awareness of patient safety in every phase of the performance consistently.

Epistemic Injustice and Nonmaleficence.

Epistemic injustice has undergone a steady growth in the medical ethics literature throughout the last decade as many ethicists have found it to be a powerful tool for describing and assessing morally problematic situations in healthcare. However, surprisingly scarce attention has been devoted to how epistemic injustice relates to physicians' professional duties on a conceptual level. I argue that epistemic injustice, specifically testimonial, collides with physicians' duty of nonmaleficence and should thus be actively fought against in healthcare encounters on the ground of professional conduct. I do so by fleshing out how Fricker's conception of testimonial injustice conflicts with the duty of nonmaleficence as defined in Beauchamp and Childress on theoretical grounds. From there, I argue that testimonial injustice produces two distinct types of harm, epistemic and non-epistemic. Epistemic harms are harms inflicted by the physician to the patient qua knower, whereas non-epistemic harms are inflicted to the patient qua patient. This latter case holds serious clinical implications and represent a failure of the process of due care on the part of the physician. I illustrate this through examples taken from the literature on fibromyalgia syndrome and show how testimonial injustice causes wrongful harm to patients, making it maleficent practice. Finally, I conclude on why nonmaleficence as a principle will not be normatively enough to fully address the problem of epistemic injustice in healthcare but nevertheless may serve as a good starting point in attempting to do so.

[Understanding/acceptance of radiotherapy: An ethical dilemma resolved by an ethics of care]. / Compréhension/acceptation de la radiothérapie : un dilemme éthique résolu par une éthique de la considération et de la sollicitude.

PURPOSE: Ethical questions are poorly investigated specifically in radiation oncology. The objective of the study was to identify and understand the main ethical issue in radiation oncology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A quantitative analysis was based on the answers to a questionnaire of 200 professionals from 22 radiation oncology departments. The questionnaire mainly aimed to characterize the main ethical issue. A monocentric qualitative analysis was based on semi-structured interviews focused on the main identified ethical issue, carried out with eight technologists, and 20 patients undergoing radiotherapy. RESULTS: The main ethical issue was the understanding and/or acceptance of the treatment by the patients (71 %), which frequently arises (more than once a month) (52 %), and corresponds to an ethical tension between the principles of respect for autonomy and beneficence (the good as viewed by the patient) as defined by Beauchamp and Childress. The technologists, wish the patient to be fully involved in his treatment, with the even possibility of refusing it. However, excluding paternalism and autonomic relentlessness, the technologists have the feeling of acting for the good of the patients by treating them with radiation, even if the patients are not always aware of it, because they are within a situation of vulnerability. If the hierarchy of principles is a compromise alternative, this problem is finally well resolved by the effective implementation of an ethic of consideration and solicitude, restoring the patient capabilities, i.e. the maximum development of his potentialities in his situation of vulnerability. Beyond the legal dimension, patient information is crucial and must consider the specific temporality of the patient. CONCLUSION: The main ethical issue in radiation oncology is the understanding and/or acceptance of the treatment involving the development of an ethic of consideration and solicitude.

Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Breast Imaging.

There is great interest in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) applications for medical imaging in general and specifically in breast imaging. Because of the scale of application and the potential for harm, there has been a parallel interest in assuring that these new technologies are scrutinized and applied in ethical ways. The four principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice are widely accepted as a framework for bioethical analysis. We incorporate a fifth principle of explicability (adapted from Floridi and Cowls) because of the unique considerations of AI. We review definitions of each of these principles and provide examples of their practical application to breast imaging.

Death as "benefit" in the context of non-voluntary euthanasia.

I offer a principled objection to arguments in favour of legalizing non-voluntary euthanasia on the basis of the principle of beneficence. The objection is that the status of death as a benefit to people who cannot formulate a desire to die is more problematic than pain management care. I ground this objection on epistemic and political arguments. Namely, I argue that death is relatively more unknowable, and the benefits it confers more subjectively debatable, than pain management. I am not primarily referring to the claim that it is difficult to make comparisons between live and post-mortem states, but rather to the fact that it is epistemically and metaphysically problematic to impute a "life-worse-than-death" or a state of "suffering-calling-for-death" to people who cannot subjectively wish to die, as though this kind of suffering were a medically observable fact rather than a belief- and value-laden notion. On the contrary, people enduring similar causes of pain may have different experiences of suffering and views on how it affects the worthwhileness of their existence or the desirability of death or of continuing their lives. The projection of a "suffering-calling-for-death" onto infants or people with severe intellectual disabilities may not be indefensible, but it is more controversial than judging that pain management will improve their well-being from the perspective of beneficence. My argument also relies on our society's liberal endeavour to avoid endorsing unverifiable beliefs about life and death or controversial conceptions of the good life. My goal is not to suggest we should not attend the suffering of cognitively disabled people. On the contrary, I only cast doubt on too quick an assumption that ending their lives is the best way of caring for them, when robust palliative treatments are available. Moreover, I express the concern that a lack of attention to distinctions between "pain-calling-for-relief" and "suffering-calling-for-death" may be based on ableist projections and assumptions. I conclude that it is imperative to continue research into the nature of pain and suffering experienced by individuals with mental or cognitive impairments preventing them from expressing autonomous wishes about the kind of treatment that would most benefit them.

Physician-Patient Relationship in Current Cosmetic Surgery Demands More than Mere Respect for Patient Autonomy-Is It Time for the Anti-Paternalistic Model?

The ethical framework of cosmetic surgery is distinct from the one associated with clinical medicine. This distinctiveness has led to significant difficulties in conceptualizing the physician-patient relationship (PPR), as most models have been developed specifically for the latter. The purpose of this article is to show that the PPR in cosmetic surgery can be better described through a distinct approach that we name the anti-paternalistic model of the PPR, and we will briefly present the differences between it and autonomy-based models. We will analyze the principle of non-interference, the variable degree of autonomy of both the patient and the physician within this relationship, the handling of the relevant information, the principle of beneficence as satisfaction, the difficulties regarding the informed consent, the algorithm allowing for the refusal of the procedure, and children-related issues. Based on this analysis, we will show that an anti-paternalistic model of the PPR is preferable to an autonomy-based one, as it allows for better clarification of the underlying ethical issues involved in cosmetic surgery.

Ethical Considerations Surrounding Surgeon Ownership of Ambulatory Surgery Centers.

As surgical care continues to transition to an outpatient setting, ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) present favorable options for physician investment. As of 2017, more than 90% of ASCs have at least some physician ownership, with 64% solely physician-owned. Yet, physician ownership creates an inherent conflict of interest known as dual agency, where clinicians have a personal financial stake in addition to their obligation towards patient well-being. Here, we assess the ethical considerations surrounding dual agency in the setting of ASCs through the lens of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice. We further propose strategies for appropriate navigation of such situations, including disclosure of ownership status, instruction on unfamiliar techniques, and adherence to accepted clinical practice guidelines for materials selection and surgical indications.

Brazilian law of inclusion: an applied analysis of the correlation of bioethical principles / Ley brasileña de inclusión: un análisis aplicado de la correlación de los principios de la bioética / Lei brasileira de inclusão: uma análise aplicada da correlação dos princípios de bioética

Abstract: Objective: The present study aims to analyse whether bioethical principles are present in the Brazilian Law of Inclusion of the Disabled Person. Methods: The study is based on a textual analysis of Law No. 13.146, of July 6, 2015 (Brazilian Law of Inclusion) using a content analysis technique regarding the bioethical principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice and autonomy. A qualitative analysis was conducted based on the concepts of these bioethical principles and their expression in the articles laid down in the Statute of the Disabled Person. Results: The obtained results demonstrate that the primary articles of the Brazilian Law of Inclusion correlate with the aforementioned bioethical principles according to the conceptualisation of each principle. Conclusion: The articles of the Brazilian Law of Inclusion, published on July 6, 2015, under the provisions of the Federal Constitution of 1988 and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, demonstrate a correlation with the stated bioethical principles.

Resumen: Objetivo: El presente estudio pretende analizar si los principios bioéticos están presentes en la Ley brasileña de inclusión de personas con discapacidad. Métodos: El estudio se basa en un análisis textual de la Ley nº 13.146 de 6 de julio de 2015 (Ley brasileña de inclusión) mediante una técnica de análisis de contenido sobre los principios bioéticos de beneficencia, no maleficencia, justicia y autonomía. Se realizó un análisis cualitativo basado en los conceptos de estos principios bioéticos y su expresión en los artículos establecidos en el Estatuto del Discapacitado. Resultados: Los resultados obtenidos muestran que los artículos primarios de la Ley de Inclusión brasileña se correlacionan con los principios bioéticos mencionados, según la conceptualización de cada principio. Conclusión: Los artículos de la Ley de Inclusión brasileña, publicada el 6 de julio de 2015, en virtud de las disposiciones de la Constitución Federal de 1988 y de la Convención sobre los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad, demuestran una correlación con los principios bioéticos enunciados.

Resumo: Objetivo: O presente estudo tem por objetivo analisar se os princípios bioéticos estão presentes na Lei Brasileira de Inclusão da Pessoa com Deficiência. Métodos: O estudo é baseado em uma análise textual da Lei nº 13.146, de 6 de julho de 2015 (Lei Brasileira de Inclusão) utilizando uma técnica de análise de conteúdo relativa aos princípios bioéticos de beneficência, não maleficência, justiça e autonomia. Uma análise qualitativa foi realizada com base nos conceitos destes princípios bioéticos e sua expressão nos artigos estabelecidos no Estatuto da Pessoa Deficiente. Resultados: Os resultados obtidos demonstram que os artigos primários da Lei de Inclusão brasileira se correlacionam com os princípios bioéticos acima mencionados, de acordo com a conceituação de cada princípio. Conclusão: Os artigos da Lei Brasileira de Inclusão, publicados em 6 de julho de 2015, sob as disposições da Constituição Federal de 1988 e da Convenção sobre os Direitos das Pessoas com Deficiência, demonstram uma correlação com os princípios bioéticos declarados.

Reflexiones sobre los valores éticos de la protección radiológica para los profesionales tecnólogos médicos de imagenología / Reflections on the ethical values of radiation protection for the professional medical technologists in imaging

Las radiaciones ionizantes tienen el potencial de generar efectos adversos a la salud de las personas. Para hacer un uso más seguro y eficiente de estas radiaciones, la Comisión Internacional de Protección Radiológica fundamentalmente ha implementado un sistema de protección radiológica (SPR) que se basa en tres principios: justificación, optimización y límites. A su vez, estos principios se sustentan en cuatro valores éticos (beneficencia, prudencia, justicia y dignidad). Se sabe que en Chile el profesional que esta mandatado para realizar la toma de los exámenes que utilizan radiaciones ionizantes es el/la Tecnólogo Médico en Imagenología. Por lo tanto, resulta interesante valorar el grado de conocimiento adquirido y posteriormente aplicado en torno a los valores éticos del SPR por parte de dichos profesionales. De esta manera el objetivo del este artículo de tipo Punto de Vista fue realizar una serie de reflexiones en torno a esta temática. Cuando se realiza un procedimientos médico u odontológico con radiaciones ionizantes, el/la Tecnólogo Médico en Imagenología participa esencialmente en la realización del mismo, por lo que no debería ser su responsabilidad el cautelar que se cumplan los 4 valores éticos descritos dentro del SPR. A juicio nuestro, el principio de optimización, sería el único principio o pilar del SPR donde tiene real obligación de participar, utilizando las restricciones a las exposiciones individuales y los niveles de referencia para diagnóstico para reducir las desigualdades en la distribución de las exposiciones entre los grupos expuestos. Finalmente, resulta vital investigar si en su formación de especialidad se tocan estas temáticas

Ionizing radiation has the potential to generate adverse effects on people's health. To make safer and more efficient use of these radiations, the International Commission on Radiological Protection has fundamentally implemented a radiological protection system (RPS) based on three principles: justification, optimization and limits. In turn, these principles are based on four ethical values (beneficence, prudence, justice and dignity). It is known that in Chile the professional who is mandated to perform the exams that use ionizing radiation is the Medical Imaging Technologist. Therefore, it is interesting to assess the degree of knowledge acquired and subsequently applied around the ethical values of the RPS by these professionals. In this way, the objective of this Point of View article was to make a series of reflections on this subject. When a medical or dental procedure is performed with ionizing radiation, the Medical Imaging Technologist essentially participates in its performance, so it should not be their responsibility to ensure that the 4 ethical values described in the RPS are met. In our opinion, the principle of optimization would be the only principle or pillar of the RPS where it has a real obligation to participate, using the restrictions on individual exposures and the diagnostic reference levels to reduce inequalities in the distribution of exposures between exposed groups. Finally, it is vital to investigate whether these topics are addressed in his specialty training.

Representation of Ethics in COVID-19 Research: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Ethical discourse in the scientific community facilitates the humane conduct of research. The urgent response to COVID-19 has rapidly generated a large body of literature to help policymakers and physicians address novel pandemic challenges. Plastic surgeons, in particular, have to manage the postponement of elective procedures and safely provide care for non-COVID-19 patients. Although COVID-19 research may provide guidance on these challenges, the extent to which ethical discussions are present in these publications remains unknown. METHODS: Articles were identified systematically by searching the PubMed, Embase, Central, and Scopus databases using search terms related to ethics and COVID-19. The search included articles published during the first 9 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. The following data were extracted: presence of an ethical discussion, date of publication, topic of ethical discussion, and scientific discipline of the article. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred fifty-three articles were included, of which seven were related to plastic surgery. The ethical principle with the greatest representation was nonmaleficence, whereas autonomy had the least representation. Equity and access to care was the most common topic of ethical discussion; the mental health effects of COVID-19 were the least common. The principle of justice had the greatest variation in representation. CONCLUSIONS: In a systematic review of COVID-19-related articles that were published during the first 9 months of the pandemic, the ethical principles of autonomy and justice are neglected in ethical discussions. As ethical dilemmas related to COVID-19 remain prevalent in plastic surgery, attention to ethical discourse should remain a top priority for leaders in the field.

Surgeons and ethical challenges in operating room.

Ethics lie in the heart of professionalism. In surgery, it represents an essential element, with surgeons facing ethical challenges in their routine practice. The rapid expansion of surgical technology and innovation along with the use of resources and consideration of conflict of interest have brought up the need for the development of current surgical code of ethics. Operating room represents a stressful environment where patients' lives depend upon careful preparation, planning and execution. The progression of surgery within the operating room must be done in harmony and in line with the ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. Discussion of ethical problems arising in the operating room is not a common subject in surgical literature. The current narrative review was planned to cover ethical concerns related to patients' safety and privacy in the operating room and some of the evolving topics, like ethics of overlapping surgery, live surgical broadcast and 'do not resuscitate' policy in the operating room.

Peer review and its ethical implications.

Peer review is an essential tool for institutions and providers to meet the modern goals of safety and quality in health care. It is a mechanism that leads to a just culture within a health care institution whereby errors and complications are considered products of the system rather than isolated actions by an individual. The benefits and potential drawbacks of peer review are outlined in this review with a special emphasis on the interface between peer review and principles of medical ethics. It is argued that peer review, in the ideal setting, is founded upon the principles of beneficence and justice, and to varying levels on non-maleficence and autonomy.

Representation of Ethics in the Plastic Surgery Literature: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: A 2009 systematic review demonstrated that ethical discourse was underrepresented in the plastic surgery literature; approximately one in 1000 articles contained ethical discussions. In the decade since, advances in plastic surgery and continued social progress have created new ethical dilemmas. However, it is unclear whether these developments have augmented the representation of ethics in the plastic surgery literature. A review of publications over the past decade can assess whether progress has been made and identify where deficits persist. METHODS: The authors searched eight bibliographic databases to identify peer-reviewed articles discussing ethical issues in plastic surgery over the past decade. Independent reviewers extracted characteristics and ethical principles from included articles. RESULTS: A total of 7097 articles were identified from the initial search and 531 articles were included for analysis. The principle of autonomy, present in 87.9 percent of articles, had the greatest representation, followed by beneficence (74.4 percent), nonmaleficence (72.3 percent), and justice (51.2 percent). Informed consent and face transplantation were the most prevalent topics discussed. Aesthetic surgery was the subdiscipline of plastic surgery with the greatest ethical discourse, representing 29.8 percent of all included articles. CONCLUSIONS: In the past decade, there was approximately a five-fold increase in plastic surgery publications that include ethical discourse, indicating a growing awareness of ethical implications by the plastic surgery community. However, representation of ethical principles remained uneven, and specific subdisciplines of plastic surgery were substantially underrepresented. Plastic surgeons should adopt a more comprehensive approach when framing ethical implications in clinical and research settings.

Parental substance and alcohol abuse: Two ethical frameworks to assess whether and how intervention is appropriate.

Ethical frameworks can support professionals' decision-making. Here, we identify two ethical frameworks to analyse the best support for families that struggle with parental substance or alcohol abuse. The first framework, which we call 'the framework of conflicting interests', is most prominent in the literature. Here, the interests of parents and children are weighed against each other using the medical ethical principles of respect for autonomy, justice, beneficence, and non-maleficence. The second framework is most prominent in a series of interviews we conducted with alcohol-dependent parents and professionals working in addiction care and youth care. This framework aligns more with an ethics of care, and starts with the assumption that the interests of people who are close to each other are often intertwined. This framework does not so much look at conflicting interests, but at relationships and vulnerability. We label this the ethics of care framework. In this article, we show the value of both frameworks and how they can support ethical decision-making.

Ethical Considerations for Elderly Patients with Cutaneous Malignancy.

Discussions of ethics in surgery generally focus on the principles of beneficence, nonmalfeasance, autonomy, and justice. Caring for elderly patients with advanced cutaneous malignancies often requires the added consideration of narrative ethics to account for the expanded circle of care, complex medical conditions, and different goals of treatment often seen in this population. By focusing on the patient's illness narrative and relying on the collective experiences of the patient and surgeon, compassionate and appropriate care can be provided for these often-devastating disease processes.