Caesarean section on request - a controversial request or the patient's right?

Caesarean section on request, a request that we have been encountering more and more recently. This can be interpreted as a primary caesarean section performed as a request of the mother without any relevant obstetrical or other medical indications in order to avoid vaginal delivery. The most common reason for mothers' requests for caesarean section is the fear of childbirth and the associated pain. Currently, medicine recognises the patient's right to actively participate in the choice of treatment procedures, including methods of delivery. We have accepted patients' claim for various aesthetic surgical interventions, in case they provide informed consent. The same principle should be maintained for caesarean sections on request.

Ethical dimensions in telemedicine - balancing technology, responsible care, and patient protection.

Telemedicine, defined as the practice of delivering healthcare services remotely using information and communications technologies, raises a plethora of ethical considerations. As telemedicine evolves, its ethical dimensions play an increasingly pivotal role in balancing the benefits of advanced technologies, ensuring responsible healthcare practices within telemedicine environments, and safeguarding patient rights. Healthcare providers, patients, policymakers, and technology developers involved in telemedicine encounter numerous ethical challenges that need to be addressed. Key ethical topics include prioritizing the protection of patient rights and privacy, which entails ensuring equitable access to remote healthcare services and maintaining the doctor-patient relationship in virtual settings. Additional areas of focus encompass data security concerns and the quality of healthcare delivery, underscoring the importance of upholding ethical standards in the digital realm. A critical examination of these ethical dimensions highlights the necessity of establishing binding ethical guidelines and legal regulations. These measures could assist stakeholders in formulating effective strategies and methodologies to navigate the complex telemedicine landscape, ensuring adherence to the highest ethical standards and promoting patient welfare. A balanced approach to telemedicine ethics should integrate the benefits of telemedicine with proactive measures to address emerging ethical challenges and should be grounded in a well-prepared and respected ethical framework.

Do not resuscitate orders and limitation of therapeutic effort: Ethical challenges in healthcare teams in Chile. / Orden de no reanimar y limitación del esfuerzo terapéutico: desafíos éticos en equipos sanitarios en Chile.

The purpose of this paper is to delve into the ethical aspects experienced by the healthcare team when they receive the directive to limit therapeutic effort or a do-not-resuscitate order. From an interpretative, qualitative paradigm with a content analysis approach, a process based on three phases was conducted: pre-analysis in which categories were identified, the projection of the analysis, and inductive analysis. During 2023, interviews were conducted in the clinical setting of a high-complexity hospital in Chile with 56 members of the healthcare teams from critical and emergency units, from which four categories emerged: a) the risk of violating patients' rights by using do-not-resuscitate orders and limiting therapeutic effort; b) the gap in the interpretation of the legal framework addressing the care and attention of patients at the end of life or with terminal illnesses by the healthcare team; c) ethical conflicts in end-of-life care; and d) efficient care versus holistic care in patients with terminal illness. There are significant gaps in bioethics training and aspects of a good death in healthcare teams facing the directive to limit therapeutic effort and not resuscitate. It is suggested to train personnel and work on a consensus guide to address the ethical aspects of a good death.

El propósito de este trabajo es profundizar en los aspectos éticos que experimenta el equipo de salud cuando reciben la indicación de limitar el esfuerzo terapéutico o la orden de no reanimar. Desde un paradigma interpretativo, cualitativo y con un enfoque de análisis de contenido, se realizó un proceso basado en tres fases: preanálisis en el que se identificaron las categorías, la proyección del análisis y el análisis inductivo. Durante 2023, se realizaron entrevistas en el entorno clínico de un hospital de alta complejidad en Chile a 56 miembros de equipos de salud de unidades críticas y urgencias, de las que emergieron cuatro categorías: a) riesgo de vulnerar los derechos de los pacientes al utilizar la orden de no reanimar, y limitación del esfuerzo terapéutico; b) brecha en la interpretación del marco legal que aborda la atención y cuidado de pacientes al final de la vida, o con enfermedades terminales por parte del equipo de salud; c) conflictos éticos de la atención al final de la vida; y d) el cuidado eficiente o el cuidado holístico en pacientes con enfermedad terminal. Existen brechas importantes en la formación en bioética y aspectos del buen morir en los equipos de salud que se enfrentan a la orden de limitar el esfuerzo terapéutico y no reanimar. Se sugiere capacitar al personal, y trabajar una guía de consenso para abordar los aspectos éticos del buen morir.

Carta dos Direitos de Segurança do Paciente

A Carta dos Direitos da Segurança do Paciente é um recurso fundamental destinado a apoiar a implementação do Plano de Ação Global para a Segurança do Paciente 2021–2030: Rumo à eliminação de danos evitáveis ​​nos cuidados de saúde. A Carta visa delinear os direitos dos pacientes no contexto da segurança e promove a defesa desses direitos, conforme estabelecido pelas normas internacionais de direitos humanos, para todos, em todos os lugares, em todos os momentos.

Carta de derechos para la seguridad del paciente

La Declaración de Derechos sobre Seguridad del Paciente es un recurso clave destinado a apoyar la implementación del Plan de acción global para la seguridad del paciente 2021-2030: hacia la eliminación de daños evitables en la atención de salud. La Carta tiene como objetivo perfilar los derechos de los pacientes en el contexto de la seguridad y promueve la defensa de estos derechos, tal como lo establecen las normas internacionales de derechos humanos, para todos, en todas partes y en todo momento.

[Access to the medical file of a deceased person]. / Mogen nabestaanden het dossier van een wilsonbekwame ouder inzien?

The Dutch Act on Patients Rights requires that physicians record all forms of treatment in the medical file of the patient concerned. This obligation ends once the patient dies. Do family members of the deceased patient then have the right to consult the medical file? This question regularly emerges when family members question the competence of a deceased person, notably when the latter before its death changed its will. According to the Act on Patients Rights access to the medical file of a deceased person by relatives is restricted to three situations. In these cases the treating physicians is required to provide access. Family members do not have the right to require the treating physician to retrospectively report on the competence of the deceased person. Family members can only ask an independent physician to advice on the competence of the deceased individual.

When Parents Request Nondisclosure: Rights of Adolescents to Access Their Health Information and Implications of the 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule.

AbstractDespite broad ethical consensus supporting developmentally appropriate disclosure of health information to older children and adolescents, cases in which parents and caregivers request nondisclosure continue to pose moral dilemmas for clinicians. State laws vary considerably regarding adolescents' rights to autonomy, privacy, and confidentiality, with many states not specifically addressing adolescents' right to their own healthcare information. The requirements of the 21st Century Cures Act have raised important ethical concerns for pediatricians and adolescent healthcare professionals regarding the protection of adolescent privacy and confidentiality, given requirements that chart notes and results be made readily available to patients via electronic portals. Less addressed have been the implications of the act for adolescents' access to their health information, since many healthcare systems' electronic portals are available to patients beginning at age 12, sometimes requiring that the patients themselves authorize their parents' access to the same information. In this article, we present a challenging case of protracted disagreement about an adolescent's right to honest information regarding his devastating prognosis. We then review the legal framework governing adolescents' rights to their own healthcare information, the limitations of ethics consultation to resolve such disputes, and the potential for the Cures Act's impact on electronic medical record systems to provide one form of resolution. We conclude that although parents in cases like the one presented here have the legal right to consent to medical treatment on their children's behalf, they do not have a corresponding right to direct the withholding of medical information from the patient.

Consensual end-of-life for depressed patients: a right or a danger?

Abstract: Recent events have brought the debate on end-of-life issues to the forefront, particularly regarding the principle of self-determination for depressed patients. Belgian legislation, in fact, allows for requesting euthanasia when patients, capable of expressing their own will consciously, suffer in an unbearable manner and find no meaning in continuing their existence, even in the absence of incurable and/or severely debilitating conditions. The state of the art is an increasing number of people who die from euthanasia. An open question is when a situation can be defined as unbearable. Moreover, does such an assessment necessarily lead to death, or are there other solutions? In our opinion, such a practice should be limited to prevent inappropriate applications that could lead to infringing depressed patients' rights.

Is it right to talk about patient safety rights?

John Tingle, Lecturer in Law, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham and Angela Eggleton, Teaching Fellow, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, discuss some reports on patient rights.

Monitoring Persons' Rights to Equal Care: Registered Nurses' Experiences of Caring for People with Mental Ill-Health and Somatic Comorbidity in Psychiatric Outpatient Care.

Persons with severe mental ill-health die early from preventable physical ill-health. Registered nurses in psychiatric outpatient care play a key role in improving persons' physical health, and it is important to examine how they view their responsibility, their experiences of care, and the obstacles they meet in providing person-centred care. The purpose of this study was to explore registered nurses' experiences of caring for persons with mental ill-health and somatic comorbidity in psychiatric outpatient care, using qualitative content analysis to analyze data from semi-structured interviews. The results show that these nurses monitored the person's right to equal care, embraced the whole of the persons suffering, and dealt with unclear boundaries in care. This highlights the unique role that registered nurses play in psychiatric outpatient care via their ability to interpret symptoms and find ways to adapt care based on persons' needs. Registered nurses consider physical health in all care and provide a link between psychiatric and somatic care. Together with mental health nurses at primary health care centers, they are key in reducing persons' suffering. There is a need for structural and functional changes in line with person-centred care including collaboration both within and outside healthcare organizations.

Exploring psychiatric patient restraints: Balancing safety, ethics, and patient rights in mental healthcare.

Restraint, often linked with limiting an individual's freedom of movement, has become a focal point of extensive discussion and evaluation within the realm of mental healthcare. Striking a delicate balance between ensuring individual safety and minimizing reliance on restraint methods poses a significant challenge. In mental health inpatient settings, the prevalent forms of restraint encompass physical, chemical, environmental, and psychological methods. Paradoxically, the consequences of employing restraint can be severe, ranging from injuries and cognitive decline to sedation and, in extreme cases, fatalities. This paper seeks to offer a nuanced exploration of the landscape surrounding psychiatric patient restraints, considering both global perspectives and specific insights from the Indian context. The guidelines outlined in India's Mental Healthcare Act of 2017, which governs the use of restraint on individuals suffering with mental illnesses, are also examined in detail.

Encontro com Especialistas - Cuidado Seguro de RN e crianças

Encontro com as Especialistas Roseli Calil, médica neonatologista da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (Unicamp); Eduarda Ribeiro dos Santos, enfermeira e advogada, docente na Faculdade Israelita Albert Einstein; Aline Hennemann, enfermeira especialista na área materno infantil, assessora da CACRIAD/DGCI/SAPS/MS; e Zeni Lamy, médica neonatologista da Universidade Federal do Maranhão (UFMA).

La objeción de conciencia en el ámbito sanitario: un equilibrio entre derechos y deberes / L’objecció de consciència en l'àmbit sanitari: un equilibri entre drets i deures / Conscientious objection in the healthcare domain: A balance between rights and responsibilities

La entrada en vigor de la Ley Orgánica 3/2021 sobre eutanasia en España (2021), ha propiciado un debate de relevancia en el ámbito de la bioética, como es el de la objeción de conciencia (OC) de los profesionales de la salud. Ahora bien, a pesar de que la literatura científica ha abordado esta cuestión, lo cierto es que la comprensión de los motivos subyacentes que impulsan a los profesionales a objetar no está del todo clara. Diversos autores han destacado que la OC halla sus fundamentos en creencias personales, ética profesional, aspectos emocionales y dinámicas del propio sistema. A su vez, se ha observado cómo hay posiciones diversas sobre la legitimidad de la OC, generando debates sobre su validez.Los objetivos de este artículo son revisar el concepto objeción de conciencia en el ámbito sanitario; analizar los factores que motivan este derecho; examinar las consecuencias de la OC en la carga asistencial de los profesionales no objetores; y explorar su posible conflicto ético con la justicia distributiva en la atención sanitaria. Por último, se reflexionará sobre la posibilidad de la OC institucional y sus posibles consecuencias en los derechos de pacientes y trabajadores.(AU)

L'entrada en vigor de la Llei Orgànica 3/2021 sobre l'eutanàsia a Espanya (2021) ha suscitat un debat rellevant en l'àmbit de la bioètica, com és el de l’objecció de consciència(OC) dels professionals de la salut. Tanmateix, malgrat que la literatura científica ha abordat aquesta qüestió, és cert que la comprensió dels motius subjacents que impulsen els professionals a objectar no està del tot clara. Diversos autors han destacatque l’OC troba els seus fonaments en creences personals, ètica professional, aspectes emocionals i dinàmiques del propi sistema. Al seu torn, s'ha observat com hi ha posicions diverses sobre la legitimitat de l’OC, generant debats sobre la seva validesa. Els objectius d'aquest article són revisar el concepte d’objecció de consciència en l'àmbit sanitari; analitzar els factors que motiven aquest dret; examinar les repercussions de l’OC en la càrrega assistencial dels professionals no objectors; i explorar el seu possible conflicte ètic amb la justícia distributiva en l'atenció sanitària. Finalment, es reflexionarà sobre la possibilitat de l’OC institucional i les seves possibles repercussions en els drets dels pacients i treballadors.(AU)

The enactment of Organic Law 3/2021 on euthanasia in Spain has sparked a significant debate in the field of bioethics, namely the issue of conscientious objection (CO) among healthcare professionals. However, despite the scientific literature addressing this matter, the understanding of the underlying reasons that drive professionals to object is not entirely clear. Several authors have highlighted that CO is rooted in personal beliefs, professional ethics, emotional aspects, and dynamics within the healthcare system. Simultaneously, there have been varying stances on the legitimacy of CO, leading to debates regarding its validity.The objectives of this article are to review the concept of conscientious objection in the healthcare context, analyze the factors motivating this right, examine the consequences of CO on the workload of non-objecting professionals, and explore its potential ethical conflict with distributive justice in healthcare. Finally, we will reflect on the possibility of institutional CO and its potential implications for the rights of patients and healthcare workers.(AU)

How different countries respond to adverse events whilst patients' rights are protected.

Patient safety is high on the policy agenda internationally. Learning from safety incidents is a core component in achieving the important goal of increasing patient safety. This study explores the legal frameworks in the countries to promote reporting, disclosure, and supporting healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in safety incidents. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted to ascertain an overview of the legal frameworks at national level, as well as relevant policies. ERNST (The European Researchers' Network Working on Second Victims) group peer-reviewed data collected from countries was performed to validate information. Information from 27 countries was collected and analyzed, giving a response rate of 60%. A reporting system for patient safety incidents was in place in 85.2% (N = 23) of countries surveyed, though few (37%, N = 10) were focused on systems-learning. In about half of the countries (48.1%, N = 13) open disclosure depends on the initiative of HCPs. The tort liability system was common in most countries. No-fault compensation schemes and alternative forms of redress were less common. Support for HCPs involved in patient safety incidents was extremely limited, with just 11.1% (N = 3) of participating countries reporting that supports were available in all healthcare institutions. Despite progress in the patient safety movement worldwide, the findings suggest that there are considerable differences in the approach to the reporting and disclosure of patient safety incidents. Additionally, models of compensation vary limiting patients' access to redress. Finally, the results highlight the need for comprehensive support for HCPs involved in safety incidents.