Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2009
[Ethical considerations of a public health intervention aimed at reducing the risk of HIV transmission in HIV-seropositive-populations who are unwilling to take precautions].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Adrien Alix, Roy David J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: 1) To describe a public health intervention aimed at reducing the risk of HIV transmission by seropositive people who are unwilling or unable to take precautions to counter HIV transmission; 2) To document ethical principles that help front-line health care professionals arrive at justifiable decisions and actions.
PARTICIPANTS: Front-line health care professionals dealing with these cases.
LOCATION: Intervention developed by la Direction de la santé publique de l'Agence de la santé et des services sociaux de Montreal.
INTERVENTION: A comité d'aide aux intervenants (CAI) was struck to advise health care professionals. To document the ethical principles that help front-line health care professionals in these situations, we undertook a multiple case study based on the committee's approach to counselling care providers for each of the 26 cases dealt with by the CAI between November 1996 and January 2003.
RESULTS: We identified 7 ethical pitfalls: expecting immediate ideal results; simplification of complex situations; generalizing uncritically from a particular case; uncritical ethical bias against coercive measures; inability or refusal to recognize and accept limits; failure to anticipate unintended consequences of an action; acting on incomplete, unvalidated, or unverifiable information.
CONCLUSION: A process of mutually exercised critical reflection can help health care professionals to identify and avoid ethical pitfalls and arrive at justifiable decisions and actions.
PARTICIPANTS: Front-line health care professionals dealing with these cases.
LOCATION: Intervention developed by la Direction de la santé publique de l'Agence de la santé et des services sociaux de Montreal.
INTERVENTION: A comité d'aide aux intervenants (CAI) was struck to advise health care professionals. To document the ethical principles that help front-line health care professionals in these situations, we undertook a multiple case study based on the committee's approach to counselling care providers for each of the 26 cases dealt with by the CAI between November 1996 and January 2003.
RESULTS: We identified 7 ethical pitfalls: expecting immediate ideal results; simplification of complex situations; generalizing uncritically from a particular case; uncritical ethical bias against coercive measures; inability or refusal to recognize and accept limits; failure to anticipate unintended consequences of an action; acting on incomplete, unvalidated, or unverifiable information.
CONCLUSION: A process of mutually exercised critical reflection can help health care professionals to identify and avoid ethical pitfalls and arrive at justifiable decisions and actions.