Professionalization of Clinical Ethics Consultants: A Need for Liability Protection?

Clinical Ethics Consultation (CEC) has grown significantly in the last decade, and efforts are being made to professionalize the practice. The American Society for Bioethics and Humanities (ASBH) has been instrumental in this process, having published the Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibilities for Healthcare Ethics Consultants and founded and endorsed the creation of the Healthcare Ethics Consultant Certified (HCEC) Certification Commission. The ASBH also published "core competencies" for healthcare ethics consultants and has delineated a clear identity and role of such consultants distinct from that other healthcare professionals. In addition, more enter the field armed with advanced degrees (MA and PhD) or certification in clinical ethics consultation. While some have questioned the trend toward professionalization, the momentum is clearly in its favor. This paper explores three questions: Does the professionalization of healthcare ethics consultation expose those engaged in the field to the types of liability claims faced by professionals in other fields? What specific liabilities could affect a healthcare ethics consultant? And finally, what should healthcare ethics consultants do to protect themselves against liability claims? We conclude that while the risk of liability remains low, those engaged in the field should accept that risk just as part of their status as professionals and, like those in allied professions, seek appropriate protection in the form of liability insurance.

Moral Distress Entangled: Patients and Providers in the COVID-19 Era.

Moral distress is defined as the inability to act according to one's own core values. During the COVID-19 pandemic, moral distress in medical personnel has gained attention, related to the impact of pandemic-associated factors, such as the uncertainty of treatment options for the virus and the accelerated pace of deaths. Measures to provide aid and mitigate the long-term pandemic effect on providers are starting to be designed. Yet, little has been said about the moral distress experienced by patients and the relational and additive effect on provider moral distress. Pandemic-associated factors affecting moral distress in patients include the constraining effects of isolation on spiritual and religious traditions as well as the intentional separation of patients from their families. This paper will explore the idea that patients are suffering their own moral distress and further how this impacts the intensity of moral distress experienced by the providers-nurses and physicians. The paucity of research in this area with the implications on patient's distress, decision making, and distress experienced by providers compels further investigation and analysis.

The Team Based Biopsychosocial Model: Having a Clinical Ethicist as a Facilitator and a Bridge Between Teams.

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.

Exploring values among three cultures from a global bioethics perspective.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation's (UNESCO) Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights refers to the importance of cultural diversity and pluralism in ethical discourse and care of humanity. The aim of this meta-narrative review is to identify indigenous ethical values pertaining to the Ojibway (Canada), Xhosa (South Africa), and Mayan (Mexico and Central American) cultures from peer-reviewed sources and cultural review, and to ascertain if there are shared commonalities. Three main themes were identified, namely illness, healing, and health care choices. Illness was described with a more complex and dynamic picture than from the western view, as illness is not considered to be one dimensional. Healing needs to take place on various levels in order to restore a state of equilibrium between the different spheres. Health care choices were also considered from a multi-level perspective. In all three of the indigenous cultures explored, good decision-making is seen to have occurred when choices are informed by commitments to one's moral and ethical responsibilities towards the community, nature, and the spirit world.