Background: Clinical ethics consultation services have been established in many countries during recent decades. An important task is to discuss concrete clinical cases. However, empirical research observing what is happening during such deliberations is scarce.
Objectives: To explore clinical ethics committees’ deliberations and to identify areas for improvement.
Design: A pilot study including observations of committees deliberating a paper case, semistructured group interviews, and qualitative analysis of the data.
Participants: Nine hospital ethics committees in Norway.
Results and interpretations: Key elements of the deliberations included identifying the ethical problems; exploring moral values and principles; clarifying key concepts and relevant legal regulation; exploring medical facts, the patient’s situation, the therapists’ perspective, analogous clinical situations, professional uncertainties, the patient’s and relatives’ perspective, and clinical communication; identifying the involved parties and how to involve them; identifying possible courses of action, and possible conclusion and follow-up. The various elements were closely interwoven. The content and conclusions varied and seemed to be contingent on the committee members’ interpretations, experience and knowledge. Important aspects of a clinical ethics deliberation were sometimes neglected. When the committees used a deliberation procedure and a blackboard, the deliberations tended to become more systematic and transparent. Many of the committees were insecure about how to include the involved parties and how to document the deliberations.
Conclusion: Clinical ethics committees may provide an important arena for multidisciplinary discussions of complex clinical ethics challenges. However, this seems to require adequate composition, adoption of transparent deliberation procedures, and targeted training.
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.
Competing interests: None declared.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Importance of systematic deliberation and stakeholder presence: a national study of clinical ethics committees
- Snapshots of five clinical ethics committees in the UK
- The current state of clinical ethics and healthcare ethics committees in Belgium
- Evaluation of end of life care in cancer patients at a teaching hospital in Japan
- Clinical ethics protocols in the clinical ethics committees of Madrid
- Development of clinical ethics services in the UK: a national survey
- “Do-not-resuscitate” orders in patients with cancer at a children’s hospital in Taiwan
- What is the role of clinical ethics support in the era of e-medicine?
- Consultation activities of clinical ethics committees in the United Kingdom: an empirical study and wake-up call
- How long is long enough, and have we done everything we should?—Ethics of calling codes