Rarely do ethics consults focus on genuine moral puzzlement in which people collectively wonder what is the right thing to do. Far more often, consults are about conflict. Each side knows quite well what is “right.” The problem is that the other side is too blind or stubborn to recognize it. And so the ethics consultant is called, perhaps in the hope that s/he will throw the weight of ethics toward one side and end the controversy so everyone can get (...) on with other business. Perhaps the greater problem in these scenarios is that even if one side “wins” by gaining the power to dictate what happens next, the toxicity permeating the relationships often markedly worsens and other conflicts erupt, major and minor. (shrink)

Fiester and Yuan (2023) address an important, hitherto underdiscussed issue: ethical hazards of behavior contracts linked to patients’ and families’ demeanor in interacting with the healthcare team...

Autumn Fiester (2015) argues that when an ethics consult simply issues a recommendation it may leave a vacuum then filled by moral distress or moral emotion. “Assisted conversation”—a dialogue-focu...

To provide effective care physicians must attend, not just to medical issues, but also to the social determinants of health — racial factors, food insecurity, housing instability, transportation barriers and beyond. Social determinants also include a largely underrecognized dimension: legal vulnerabilities such as rental evictions and debt adjudications. Yet rarely do medical trainees have an opportunity to witness legal vulnerabilities, firsthand.

Many major medical institutions have now embraced the idea that it is best to be honest with patients and families when an error causes harm that could have been avoided. This kind of disclosure improves patient safety and quality of care; enhances satisfaction for patients, families, and providers; and reduces malpractice litigation costs. The University of Michigan has perhaps the best‐known program. Since 2001, that institution has seen more than a 55 percent drop in the number of new malpractice claims (...) filed, a comparable reduction in lawsuits, and a dramatic drop in both defense costs and malpractice payouts—money then redirected toward quality improvement. A few states have also embraced this approach, sometimes known as “Candor” (for “communication and optimal resolution”). Yet all of these efforts face a major challenge. Although many physicians would like very much to achieve insight, reconciliation, and quality improvement in just this way, many fear that money paid to resolve an incident in which they were involved can result in a lifelong black mark in the National Practitioner Data Bank. (shrink)

The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 12, Issue 3, Page 1-3, March 2012.

Conflicts in the clinical setting can spiral downward with remarkable speed, as parties become ever more incensed and entrenched in their positions. Productive conversations seem unlikely at best. Nevertheless, such situations can sometimes be turned into collaborative problem solving with equally remarkable speed. For this to happen, those providing conflict-resolution services such as mediation need to bring, not just a set of skills, but also some key norms: the process must be voluntary for all; the mediator must abjure giving advice (...) or taking sides, and must honor the privacy of privately offered thoughts. This article describes a conflict that had reached the point of a hospital’s requesting judicial coercion. However, a conflict-resolution process was then initiated that, in the end, led to amicable resolution and mended relationships, obviating the need for court orders. This article describes that conflict and the resolution process in detail, along the way annotating specific strategies that are often highly effective. (shrink)

In the principles of informed consent we state that each person ought to be free to make his or her own decisions regarding his or her life and health — provided that he or she is mentally competent to do so. Here, the concept of competence plays a crucial role. Where one is competent our moral goal is to promote his or her freedom; if he or she is not, our priority must be to protect and help him or her. (...) In this paper I discuss three different notions of patient competence. The first, rational competence, concerns the basic ability to make a decision. The second, performance competence, concerns one's ability to make decisions and perform skills in ways that measure up to certain external standards. The third, reflective competence, concerns one's ability to identify and critically to scrutinize one's own values — one's ability, that is, to formulate and to evaluate one's own internal standards of decision and action. This richer analysis of the concept of competence enables us to formulate more precisely the moral difficulties we face when competence is impaired. (shrink)

Patients who leave the hospital prior to their medically recommended endpoint (i.e., a discharge against medical advice, or “AMA”) typically prompt considerable consternation among physicians and o...