Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 5.988
Filtrar
6.
BMJ ; 368: m1139, 2020 03 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32205335
12.
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen ; 139(17)2019 Nov 19.
Artículo en Noruego, Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31746156
13.
Z Gerontol Geriatr ; 52(Suppl 4): 243-248, 2019 Nov.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31602507

RESUMEN

The use of freedom-depriving measures (physical and medicinal restraints) in people with cognitive impairment or dementia in clinical care settings is of ongoing importance. At the same time, these coercive measures are not only heavily debated but also in most cases ethically questionable from the perspective of the ethics of human dignity. Usually, the ethical evaluation of freedom-depriving measures follows classical paradigms of medical ethics, such as the Principles of Biomedical Ethics by Beauchamp and Childress. To enrich the debate at this point, the ethical category of embodiment ("Leiblichkeit" ) is introduced and discussed after a short summary of the ethical problem at hand. The phenomenon of the living body that has received increasingly more attention in several sciences since the proclaimed "corporeal turn" enables new perspectives towards human dignity, freedom and deprivation of freedom: freedom-depriving measures do not take place in an invisible realm of ideas but are directly applied to the psychophysical unity that is the living body of a person. Thus, freedom-depriving measures are an intervention into the bodily autonomy of the human being and the personal freedom that is manifested in the living body. The concept of the living body ("Leib") that is applied here, signifies more than just a physical object and is especially apt to capture the (inter)subjective dimension that has to be taken into account here. Finally, it will have to be investigated whether the use of medicinal restraints represents an especially serious interference into the sphere of human embodiment. Once introduced into the debate on freedom-depriving measures in clinical care, the category of embodiment can warrant decisive new emphases.


Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos/ética , Demencia/terapia , Libertad , Derechos del Paciente/ética , Autonomía Personal , Respeto , Cuidados Críticos/psicología , Toma de Decisiones , Ética Médica , Humanos
14.
Am J Bioeth ; 19(10): W9-W13, 2019 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31557098
17.
Perspect Biol Med ; 62(3): 489-502, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31495793

RESUMEN

While mainstream, establishment medical journals have published opinion pieces condemning conscientious refusals in medical care, American law has consistently and repeatedly supported a right to such refusals. Law has not relied on a particular philosophical basis for health care. Indeed, legal precedents reject any monolithic model, whether based on consumerism or on professional obligations. Law focuses on the coexistence of diverse understandings, motivations, and delivery models. Scholarly approaches tend to ignore the fact that, fundamentally, conscientious objection involves a minority telling the majority that the objector(s) cannot ethically participate according to the majority's preferred model or set of rules. Religious liberty is protected in the US by applying strict scrutiny. Any governmental burden on religious liberty must further a compelling governmental interest and be implemented using the least restrictive means reasonably available. After years of scholarly controversy, strict scrutiny continues to be the law. The moral basis for the legal right of conscientious objection has been affirmed and expanded by Hobby Lobby in 2014, outlined in an Attorney General Memorandum in 2017, and codified in a Final Conscience Rule by the Department of Health and Human Services in May 2019.


Asunto(s)
Rechazo Conciente al Tratamiento/ética , Libertad , Relaciones Médico-Paciente/ética , Aborto Inducido , Rechazo Conciente al Tratamiento/legislación & jurisprudencia , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/ética , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/legislación & jurisprudencia , Humanos , Obligaciones Morales , Estados Unidos
18.
BMC Public Health ; 19(1): 1082, 2019 Aug 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31399049

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Active transportation (AT), independent mobility (IM), and outdoor time are promising ways to increase children's physical activity. However, in order to create interventions to increase those forms of physical activity, it is important to understand the relationships between area-level socioeconomic status (SES) and type of urbanization with AT, IM, outdoor time, and physical activity, and this was the aim of the study. METHODS: One thousand six hundred ninety-nine children in grades 4 to 6 (mean age: 10.2 ± 1.0 years) from three Canadian regions participated. AT, IM, and outdoor time were assessed using questionnaires and physical activity was measured using the SC-StepRX pedometer. Area-level SES was assessed using the median household income of the census tract in which the school was located and type of urbanization was determined for each school using standardized procedures. Generalized linear and general linear mixed models were used to examine the relationships. RESULTS: Area-level SES and the type of urbanization were generally not related to AT, IM, or physical activity for either gender. However, we observed that both boys and girls living in lower SES areas had decreased odds of spending > 2 h outdoors on weekend days compared to their peers from higher SES areas. Girls living in suburban or rural areas were more likely to spend > 2 h outdoors on weekdays compared to their urban counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: AT, IM, and physical activity are generally not associated with area-level SES or the type of urbanization in this sample of Canadian children. The finding regarding outdoor time showing that both boys and girls of lower SES areas had decreased odds of spending > 2 h outdoors on weekends compared to their peers from higher SES areas suggest that additional efforts should be implemented to offer outdoor play opportunities in lower SES areas.


Asunto(s)
Ejercicio Físico/fisiología , Libertad , Áreas de Pobreza , Transportes/estadística & datos numéricos , Urbanización , Adolescente , Canadá , Niño , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Factores de Tiempo
19.
J Int Bioethique Ethique Sci ; Vol. 30(2): 169-180, 2019 07 02.
Artículo en Francés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31460734

RESUMEN

Faced with complex situations, caregivers test one of the oldest philosophical questions: how to prove the freedom of a decision? In the care, it is a question of determining if the patient has understood the situation, evaluated the consequences of his choice and if his decision is taken in the absence of any constraint. In other words, is the patient's decision an autonomous decision? But what are the tools that make it possible to evaluate this autonomy precisely and objectively? And also, how to promote a greater autonomy?


Asunto(s)
Toma de Decisiones , Metafisica , Autonomía Personal , Relaciones Médico-Paciente/ética , Conducta de Elección , Libertad , Humanos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA