In an international survey of rationing we have found that European physicians encounter scarcity-related ethical difficulties, and are dissatified with the resolution of many of these cases. Here we further examine survey results to explore whether ethics support services would be potentially useful in addressing scarcity related ethical dilemmas. Results indicate that while the type of help offered by ethics support services was considered helpful by physicians, they rarely referred difficulties regarding scarcity to ethics consultation. We propose that ethics consultants could assist physicians by making the process less difficult, and by contributing to decisions being more ethically justifiable. Expertise in bringing considerations of justice to bear on real cases could also be useful in recognising an unjust limit, as opposed to a merely frustrating limit. Though these situations are unlikely to be among the most frequently referred to ethics support services, ethics consultants should be prepared to address them.
- clinical ethics
- ethics consultation
- healthcare rationing
- health resources
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Funding: This work was funded by the Department of Clinical Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health, and was conducted while SAH was a fellow at this Department. SAH was funded in part by the University Hospitals of Geneva, by the Oltramare Foundation, by the Centre Lémanique d’Ethique, and by the Swiss National Science Foundation.
Competing interests: None.
Ethics approval: Approval was given by the IRB of the National Institute of Child Health and Development at the US National Institutes of Health, and by the Trent Multi-Centre Research Ethics Committee in the UK. This study was examined and designated exempt from ethics committee review by IRBs in Norway, Italy, and Switzerland.
This article is based on an earlier version to be published in German,51 with the authorisation of the editors. The views expressed here are the authors’ own, and do not reflect the position of the National Institutes of Health, of the Public Health Service, or of the Department of Health and Human Services. Also, they are not necessarily those of the University Hospitals of Geneva, the Oltramare Foundation or the Centre Lémanique d’Ethique.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Ethical difficulties in clinical practice: experiences of European doctors
- Croatian physicians’ and nurses’ experience with ethical issues in clinical practice
- Need for ethics support in healthcare institutions: views of Dutch board members and ethics support staff
- Ethics consultation in paediatric and adult emergency departments: an assessment of clinical, ethical, learning and resource needs
- Just compassion: implications for the ethics of the scarcity paradigm in clinical healthcare provision
- How physicians face ethical difficulties: a qualitative analysis
- Ethics support in institutional elderly care: a review of the literature
- In quest of justice? Clinical prioritisation in healthcare for the aged
- Challenging misconceptions about clinical ethics support during COVID-19 and beyond: a legal update and future considerations
- Consultation activities of clinical ethics committees in the United Kingdom: an empirical study and wake-up call