Описание: Offering a teachable alternative to the dominant principle-based theories in the field, the author`s approach is not based on an ethics of abstract obligations and duties but, following Aristotle, on how to live a fulfilled and happy life - in short, an ethics of personal well-being grounded in prudence, the virtue of ethical decision making.
Описание: The question of whether and how decisions are made in respect of a child's medical treatment has become a matter of significant public controversy following the highly publicised cases of Charlie Gard (Great Ormond Street Hospital v Yates 2017]) and Alfie Evans (Alder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust v Evans et al 2018]). In light of this background, this timely collection brings together commentators from law, medical ethics and clinical medicine, actively drawing on the view from the clinic as well as philosophical, legal and sociological perspectives on the crucial question of who should decide about the fate of a child suffering from a serious illness. In particular, the collection looks at whether the current 'best interests' threshold is the appropriate boundary for legal intervention, or whether it is appropriate to adopt the 'risk of significant harm' approach proposed in Yates. Moreover, it explores the respective roles of parents, doctors and the courts and the possible risks of inappropriate state intrusion in parental decision-making, and how we might address them.
In the wake of the Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans cases, a wide-ranging international conversation was started regarding alternative thresholds for intervention and the different balances that can be made in weighing up the rights and interests of the child, the parent's rights and responsibilities and the role of medical professionals and the courts. This collection provides a comparative perspective on these issues by bringing together analysis from a range of jurisdictions across Europe, North and South America, Africa and Asia.
Contextualising the differences and similarities, and drawing out the cultural and social values that inform the approach in different countries, this volume is highly valuable to scholars across jurisdictions, not only to inform their own local debate on how best to navigate such cases, but also to foster inter-jurisdictional debate on the issues. The book brings together commentators from the fields of law, medical ethics, and clinical medicine across the world, actively drawing on the view from the clinic as well as philosophical, legal and sociological perspectives on the crucial question of who should decide about the fate of a child suffering from a serious illness. In doing so, the collection offers comprehensive treatment of the key questions around whether the current best interests approach is still appropriate, and if not, what the alternatives are. It engages head-on with the concerns seen in both the academic and popular literature that there is a need to reconsider the orthodoxy in this area.
Описание: A resource for scholars and students of international public health, this volume analyses the global system for sharing pathogens for research into diagnostics, medicines, and vaccines. Authors trace the problems posed by negotiating for access to biological resources and offer solutions to ensure that politics do not threaten biomedical advances.
Автор: Ross, Lainie Friedman Название: Children, Families, and Health Care Decision-Making (Hardback) ISBN: 0198237634 ISBN-13(EAN): 9780198237631 Издательство: Oxford Academ Рейтинг: Цена: 22572.00 р. Наличие на складе: Есть у поставщика Поставка под заказ.
Описание: Examines the moral principles that guide parents in making health care decisions for their children, and the role of children in the decision-making process. This book argues against the movement to increase child autonomy, in favor of respect for family autonomy. It is meant for health care providers, ethicists, and public policy analysts.
Описание: This interdisciplinary book for philosophers, legal scholars, and medico-legal practitioners offers a unique relational account of mental capacity through critical analysis of concepts such as autonomy and rationality. It explores how relationships, and specific relational, dialogical practices, can enable or disable the decision-making of individuals with impairments.
Описание: Offering a teachable alternative to the dominant principle-based theories in the field, the author`s approach is not based on an ethics of abstract obligations and duties but, following Aristotle, on how to live a fulfilled and happy life - in short, an ethics of personal well-being grounded in prudence, the virtue of ethical decision making.
In the wake of the Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans cases, a wide-ranging international conversation was started regarding alternative thresholds for intervention and the different balances that can be made in weighing up the rights and interests of the child, the parent's rights and responsibilities and the role of medical professionals and the courts. This collection provides a comparative perspective on these issues by bringing together analysis from a range of jurisdictions across Europe, North and South America, Africa and Asia.
By contextualising the differences and similarities and by drawing out the cultural and social values that inform the approach in different countries, this volume is therefore highly valuable to scholars across jurisdictions to inform their own local debate on how best to navigate such cases, but also to foster inter-jurisdictional debate on the issues.
The book brings together commentators from the fields of law, medical ethics, and clinical medicine across the world, actively drawing on the view from the clinic as well as philosophical, legal and sociological perspectives on the crucial question of who should decide about the fate of a child suffering from a serious illness.
In doing so, the collection offers comprehensive treatment of the key questions around whether the current best interests approach is still appropriate, and if not, what the alternatives are. It engages head on with the concerns seen in both the academic and popular literature that there is a need to reconsider the orthodoxy in this area.
Описание: How the politics of “medical necessity” complicates American health care The definition of medical necessity has morphed over the years, from a singular physician’s determination to a complex and dynamic political contest involving patients, medical companies, insurance companies, and government agencies. In this book, Daniel Skinner constructs a comprehensive understanding of the politics of defining this concept, arguing that sustained political engagement with medical necessity is essential to developing a health care system that meets basic public health objectives.From medical marijuana to mental health to reproductive politics, the concept of medical necessity underscores many of the most divisive and contentious debates in American health care. Skinner’s close reading of medical necessity’s production illuminates the divides between perceptions of medical need as well as how the gatekeeper concept of medical necessity tends to frame medical objectives. He questions the wisdom of continuing to use medical necessity when thinking critically about vexing health care challenges, exploring the possibility that contracts, rights, and technology may resolve the contentious politics of medical necessity.Skinner ultimately contends that a major shift is needed, one in which health care administrators, doctors, and patients admit that medical necessity is, at its base, a contestable political concept.
Описание: This timely collection brings together philosophical, legal and sociological perspectives on the crucial question of who should make decisions about the fate of a child suffering from a serious illness. In particular, the collection looks at whether the current ‘best interests’ threshold is the appropriate boundary for legal intervention, or whether it would be more appropriate to adopt the ‘risk of significant harm’ approach proposed in Gard. It explores the roles of parents, doctors and the courts in making decisions on behalf of children, actively drawing on perspectives from the clinic as well as academia and practice. In doing so, it teases out the potential risks of inappropriate state intrusion in parental decision-making, and considers how we might address them.
How the politics of “medical necessity” complicates American health care
The definition of medical necessity has morphed over the years, from a singular physician’s determination to a complex and dynamic political contest involving patients, medical companies, insurance companies, and government agencies. In this book, Daniel Skinner constructs a comprehensive understanding of the politics of defining this concept, arguing that sustained political engagement with medical necessity is essential to developing a health care system that meets basic public health objectives.
From medical marijuana to mental health to reproductive politics, the concept of medical necessity underscores many of the most divisive and contentious debates in American health care. Skinner’s close reading of medical necessity’s production illuminates the divides between perceptions of medical need as well as how the gatekeeper concept of medical necessity tends to frame medical objectives. He questions the wisdom of continuing to use medical necessity when thinking critically about vexing health care challenges, exploring the possibility that contracts, rights, and technology may resolve the contentious politics of medical necessity.
Skinner ultimately contends that a major shift is needed, one in which health care administrators, doctors, and patients admit that medical necessity is, at its base, a contestable political concept.
ООО "Логосфера " Тел:+7(495) 980-12-10 www.logobook.ru
