Search

Given the nature of the discipline, it might be assumed that clinical psychology is an ethical profession, within which effective ethical decision-making is integral. How then, does this ethical decision-making occur? This paper describes a systematic review of empirical research addressing this question. The paucity of evidence related to this question meant that the scope was broadened to include other professions who deliver talking therapies. This review could support reflective practice about what may be taken into account when making ethical decisions and highlight areas for future research. Using academic search databases, original research articles were identified from peer-reviewed journals. Articles using qualitative (n = 3), quantitative (n = 8) and mixed methods (n = 2) were included. Two theoretical models of aspects of ethical decision-making were identified. Areas of agreement and debate are described in relation to factors linked to the professional, which impacted ethical decision-making. Factors relating to ethical dilemmas, which impacted ethical decision-making, are discussed. Articles were appraised by two independent raters, using quality assessment criteria, which suggested areas of methodological strengths and weaknesses. Comparison and synthesis of results revealed that the research did not generally pertain to current clinical practice of talking therapies or the particular socio-political context of the UK healthcare system. There was limited research into ethical decision-making amongst specific professions, including clinical psychology. Generalisability was limited due to methodological issues, indicating avenues for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2014, Lord Saatchi launched his ultimately unsuccessful Medical Innovation Bill in the UK. Its laudable aim was to free doctors from the shackles that prevented them from providing responsible innovative treatment. Lord Saatchi's principal contention was that current law was the unsurmountable barrier that prevented clinicians from delivering innovative treatments to cancer patients when conventional options had failed. This was because doctors feared that they might be sued or tried and convicted of gross negligence manslaughter if they deviated from standard practice. Concerns about fear of the law and potential negative effects on medical practice are not new. Fear of litigation has been suggested as the reason for doctors practising "defensive medicine," by opting for treatments regarded as "grievance-resistant," rather than clinically indicated, for example, by ordering diagnostic tests or performing certain procedures, which are not strictly medically necessary. Whilst this claim is plausible and apparently accepted by the courts, there is limited empirical evidence in support of it so far as practitioners in the UK are concerned. In this paper, we report on our empirical research which provides a snapshot of medical opinion to begin to rectify this gap. We ran focus groups of different medical specialties, asking what these medical practitioners thought the barriers to medical innovation to be. We found that fear of the law was not the principal barrier to be lowered, and that the answer was far more multifaceted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A UK doctor was recently acquitted of charges of reinstating a variety of female genital mutilation after delivering a child. In this paper, I contend that this incident reflects a broader confusion concerning the ethico-legal status of non-therapeutic genital surgeries for children and adults, which are not derivable from tenets of medical ethics, but rather violate them. I argue that medical professionals have an obligation to announce and address this confusion in order to motivate legislative reform, since the inconsistency of the current law entrenches the underlying sexism and ethnocentrism upon which its sense depends. Without convincing arguments for (a) condoning male circumcision and female cosmetic genital surgery and for (b) treating adult women of colour as lacking the capacity to consent, the current legislation stands in need of urgent revision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The value of human bodies for the teaching of anatomy has been recognized since the 16th century. Many medical students are exposed to the process of body donation as human dissection continues to play a fundamental role in many medical courses. The opportunity of dissection not only provides students with an educational approach to learning human structure but also exposes them to the emotions surrounding death and dying and the role of the anatomical donor in their journey. This paper explores the subject of body donation in relation to anatomical examination, the relationship the donor has to the medical student experience and the purpose of thanksgiving services. The paper concludes with a brief description of a study carried out at a UK medical school to seek the views of first- and second-year medical students on the purpose, place and value of thanksgiving services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we offer a new account of disability. According to our account, some state of a person's biology or psychology is a disability if that state makes it more likely that a person's life will get worse, in terms of his or her own wellbeing, in a given set of social and environmental circumstances. Unlike the medical model of disability, our welfarist approach does not tie disability to deviation from normal species' functioning, nor does it understand disability in essentialist terms. Like the social model of disability, the welfarist approach sees disability as a harmful state that results from the interaction between a person's biology and psychology and his or her surrounding environment. However, unlike the social model, it denies that the harm associated with disability is entirely due to social prejudice or injustice. In this paper, we outline and clarify the welfarist approach, answer common objections and illustrate its usefulness in addressing a range of difficult ethical questions involving disability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is now broadly accepted that disability is a concept infused with both descriptive and evaluative meaning, such that invoking the concept of disability necessarily involves making judgements of moral value as well as describing certain facts about individuals. This paper aims to map the complex terrain that shapes our current understandings of disability by outlining five distinct 'discourses of disability'. It is shown how the similarities and differences between the discourses hinge on different ways of making sense of the descriptive and evaluative dimensions of the concept, and the relationships between these dimensions. The paper concludes by considering the specific implications that these different ways of elucidating the concept of disability might have for the provision of clinical ethics support, both in terms of shaping ethical decision-making relating to people with disabilities and in terms of framing the process of providing clinical ethics support itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper recounts the events surrounding the case of Ashley X, a severely disabled young girl whose parents opted for oestrogen therapy, a hysterectomy and breast removal - the so-called 'Ashley treatment' - in order to reduce her projected adult weight and improve her quality of life. Following a description of the events leading up to the procedure itself, and the worldwide debate which ensued, the main arguments in favour and against the procedures are presented. The paper also critically engages with a recent defence of the treatments presented by one of those closely involved with the case - Dr D Diekema. Finally, the recommendations of a report which criticizes procedures at the hospital in which the treatments took place are described, and it is argued that the main recommendation regarding the constitution of the Hospital Ethics Committee (HEC) is ill-thought through and is unlikely to have made any difference to the decision taken by the HEC to approve the Ashley treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper recognizes the complexity of the debate on informed consent and discusses the importance of the ongoing process of consent for people affected by Huntington's disease (HD). Although written information may not be the most appropriate form of obtaining informed consent in qualitative research, it remains an important part of the ethical approval process for health research in the UK. This paper draws on a study in which the information sheet and consent form were specifically designed to help obtain consent from people who may be impaired by the cognitive and physical effects of HD. The forms were developed by drawing on expert opinion and relevant literature and fall in line with recommendations from the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to encourage people to make their own decisions. The paper describes the feasibility of a method for obtaining consent as an ongoing process with patients affected by HD using information sheets and consent forms specifically designed for people with potential cognitive and/or physical impairments. In conclusion, this paper adds a pragmatic approach to the debate on informed consent by describing the development of a written information sheet and consent form being used in a current social research study. Particular emphasis is placed on the importance of written information being adapted according to the needs of potential participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the role of clinical ethics committees (CECs) in infertility clinics in the UK, focusing on whether they usefully support infertility clinicians' ethical decision-making. The overall aim of the study reported here was to investigate how infertility clinicians approached and handled ethical problems in their everyday practice and this paper reports on one aspect of these data - what they thought about the use of CECs. This paper gives an overview of what arrangements there are for such committees in infertility clinics; considers why the clinicians used CECs; and examines how these committees provided a useful function in the infertility setting and contributed to making 'good' ethical decisions. Finally, the paper examines how the form of ethics support can be developed and strengthened, and concludes with recommendations for a particular model of CECs in infertility units - a designated CEC for each infertility unit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Genetics holds the key to understanding normal human biology and possibly many of the major causes of human disease and impairment. Research into human developmental genetics seems, therefore, to be both necessary and justified. However, such research requires the use of embryonic and fetal tissue obtained from spontaneous abortions and elective termination of pregnancy. This paper examines the arguments in favour of using tissue from elective terminations and the evolution of regulatory frameworks for this research. The paper argues that the recent statutory and regulatory reforms in the UK have not properly addressed the issue of ethically obtaining postimplantation human embryos for research. It is argued that the recent reforms have left the Polkinghorne guidelines untouched but that these are now unequal to the task. A practical suggestion for reform of the approach to the informing and consent of potential donors is offered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent UK reports have revealed extensive evidence of unethical care practices. Older and vulnerable patients in some British health services have experienced appalling and avoidable suffering. Explanations for, and solutions to, these care failures have been proposed with wide-ranging recommendations. Many of these have direct implications for clinical ethics with additional frameworks for ethical values proposed, a heightened awareness of the moral culture of organisations acknowledged and a renewed interest in the ethics component of professional education debated. In this paper, I suggest that we integrate insights from the slow movement into clinical ethics practice. Distinctions are made between fast and slow healthcare practice and between fast and slow ethics. I argue that, whilst there is a place for both, slow ethics enables us to assume a more positive stance in relation to ‘crisis’, and requires that we learn from past accounts and scholarship and consider the role of clinical ethics in sustaining caring cultures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

All major religions accept that organ donation is an individual choice and the same is true when it comes to donating one's whole body to medical science. While religious groups have 'official' views, it is common, given the various denominations and subgroups within a religion, to have deviation from the official message. This paper provides some insight into the views of religious leaders from one local community in the UK on the act of body donation. The paper also demonstrates the importance that the Abrahamic religions place on providing opportunities for remembrance and thanksgiving for those who have died and how this is extended through the services of thanksgiving that are held by medical schools for those who have donated their bodies to medical science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that qualitative research is both useful and necessary, as it provides an essential means of gaining a richer understanding of patients' perceptions, social processes and meanings. In their paper in this edition of Clinical Ethics, Hallowell and Lawton raise many issues relating to the way that qualitative research is treated by RECs in the UK. In this paper I discuss just three key topics stimulated by their paper: the way that methodology relates to ethics, the experience and character of the researcher, and the normative/descriptive distinction. I strongly support Hallowell and Lawton's appeal for greater communication between qualitative researchers and RECs. In other respects, I would argue that they do not go far enough. The recent review of research ethics structures and the review process provides an opportunity to move away from the present 'one size fits all' approach to ethical review. I would argue that this change could only benefit qualitative research and researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Commission on Assisted Dying was an unofficial body set up to investigate the legal position on assisted dying in the UK in the autumn of 2010. Its report was published to some degree of media attention in the first week of January 2012; its most headline-grabbing suggestion provided a framework setting out how British law might be reformed to allow assisted dying for the terminally ill. In this paper, I analyse some of the key points of the report and argue that it adds little that could settle - or even add to - the assisted dying debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 establishes the statutory offence of corporate manslaughter, replacing the previous common law corporate liability for manslaughter. Health-care providers are potentially liable. This includes, but is not restricted to, National Health Service bodies. This paper considers the hypothetical liability of the various bodies involved in a well-known case of death arising from medical error, had the Act been in force when it occurred. The discussion illustrates the likelihood of difficulty in establishing liability. This difficulty arises not only from the requirements of the Act but also the involvement of several different bodies in the facts and circumstances of the fatal mistake. There are implications for a National Health Service whose future is likely to include greater fragmentation of service provision, with a greater number of corporate providers. Successful prosecutions for corporate manslaughter are expected to remain rare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a significant body of evidence showing that patients want to know when they are harmed as a result of their medical care. In 2005 the National Patient Safety Agency issued guidance on the process to be followed when communicating errors to patients and their carers. However, there is still a significant gap between the rhetoric of being open and clinical practice. This gap reflects the competing interests arising from the concept of being open and the difficulties involved in the process itself. This paper presents several case studies to explore the complexities of being open and the organizational support required to overcome these. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports from an ongoing multidisciplinary, ethnographic study that is exploring the views, values and practices (the ethical frameworks) drawn on by professional staff in assisted conception units and stem cell laboratories in relation to embryo donation for research purposes, particularly human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research, in the UK. We focus here on the connection between possible incidental findings and the circumstances in which embryos are donated for hESC research, and report some of the uncertainties and dilemmas of our staff participants. We explore the views of our study participants in relation to two themes: (1) rights to information and anticipating how donors might be informed about future research findings and (2) occupational work goals and trust. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current General Medical Council (GMC) guidelines state that any doctor who does not wish to carry out a non-therapeutic circumcision (NTC) on a boy must invoke conscientious objection. This paper argues that this is illogical, as it is clear that an ethical doctor will object to conducting a clinically unnecessary operation on a child who cannot consent simply because of the parents' religious beliefs. Comparison of the GMC guidelines with the more sensible British Medical Association guidance reveals that both are biased in favour of NTC and subvert standard consent procedures. It is further argued that any doctor who does participate in NTC of a minor may be guilty of negligence and in breach of the Human Rights Act. In fact, the GMC guidance implies that doctors must claim conscientious objection if they do not wish to be negligent. Both sets of guidelines should be changed to ensure an objective consent process and avoid confusion over the ethics of NTC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public policy on alcohol in the UK relies on health promotion campaigns that encourage individuals who misuse alcohol to make healthier choices about their drinking. Individuals with alcohol-dependence syndrome have an impaired capacity to choose health. As a result, individuals with the worst alcohol misuse problems lie largely outside the reach of choice-based policy. However, such policy has been widely criticized and efforts to reform it are underway. This paper argues that the British Medical Association's recent attempt to improve policy on alcohol in the UK by introducing strategies which have been shown to control drinking within populations still gives insufficient attention to alcohol dependence. This is because it fails accurately and consistently to characterize alcohol dependence and gives insufficient attention to the social challenges it presents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The General Medical Council instructs doctors not to allow their personal beliefs to interfere with their practice. But if attitudes can threaten to impact negatively on a doctor's practice then the question arises: should doctors ever be professionally required to change their attitudes? In this paper I suggest that doctors should be required to amend their attitudes if two conditions are met, namely: (1) the doctor has an attitude that if neglected by the doctor will (or is very likely to) compromise his or her fitness to practise; and (2) the only way in which the doctor can prevent that attitude from compromising his or her fitness to practise is by changing the attitude. I also answer three objections that might be raised against the position that I advance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Developments in biotechnology present difficult social and ethical challenges that need to be resolved by regulators among others. One crucial problem for regulators of new technologies is to ensure that regulation is both clear and sufficiently flexible to respond to new developments. This is particularly difficult to achieve in contentious fields such as medical biotechnology. In the European Union there is a divergence in the solutions to this problem which has lead to different regulatory frameworks for medical biotechnology. This paper compares and contrasts the British and Dutch regulatory frameworks for the selection of embryos by preimplantation genetic diagnosis as an example of the regulation of medical biotechnology. Some of the outcomes of the regulatory choices and possible reasons behind the divergent frameworks are discussed, such as the ethical outlooks and political systems in these countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The issue of directed donation of organs from deceased donors for transplantation has recently risen to the fore, given greater significance by the relatively stagnant rate of deceased donor donation in the UK. Although its status and legitimacy is explicitly recognized across the USA, elsewhere a more cautious, if not entirely negative, stance has been taken. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the Human Tissue Act 2004, and in Scotland the Human Tissue (Scotland) Act 2006, are both silent in this regard. Although so-called conditional donation, donation to (or perhaps withheld from) a specific class, has been outlawed as a product of guidance issued by the Secretary of State for Health issued in the wake of the controversial incident occurring in the North of England in 1998, its intended application to 'directed' donation is less certain. Directed and conditional donations challenge the traditional construct of altruistic donation and impartial (equitable) allocation in a very immediate and striking fashion. They implicitly raise important questions as to whether the body or parts of the body are capable of being owned, and by whom. This paper attempts to explore the notion of donor ownership of body parts and its implications for both directed and conditional donation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the General Medical Council (GMC) is currently in the process of reviewing its ethical guidance onconfidentiality, it is a prescient time to consider the legal and ethical issues inherent in it. This paper examines the question of anonymized data, and highlights the fact that the legal position regarding whether it should be classed as confidential is unclear, with the possibility of a change in the law being very real. Indeed, the article argues that the notion that anonymized data is not confidential can be challenged on both legal and ethical grounds, and thus that the GMC should take this into account in its new guidance. Although identifying the fact that this might have implications for epidemiological research, the article highlights an alternative approach that would allow the conduct of such research while not infringing patients' legally protected human rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Labioplasty is a surgical procedure performed to alter the size and shape of the labia minora. The reasons for women requesting this procedure remain largely unknown and recently girls and young women under the age of 18 years have been requesting this type of surgery. This paper examines the ethical acceptability of performing this procedure on under 18s. We will first discuss whether labioplasty can be considered to be a therapeutic technique. We will claim that, while it is difficult to offer a definitive definition of what constitutes a therapeutic technique, in our view labioplasty cannot be considered as such. This conclusion has relevance for the ethical acceptability of the procedure, its legal status in regard to the Female Genital Mutilation Act and the debates over who can give consent for it. It will be concluded that in our current state of knowledge, the benefits of labioplasty are far from clear, whereas the harms are demonstrable and therefore this procedure should not be offered to those aged under 18 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Do UK community pharmacists encounter the high drama dilemmas of the medical ethics literature or is a 'morality of the mundane' more appropriate? This paper presents the findings of a qualitative study that asked a sample of UK pharmacists to describe their ethical issues and to establish whether these were ethical dilemmas as understood philosophically or ethical problems of a more legal or emotional nature. It emerged that although many pharmacists referred to 'dilemmas', these were often problems involving a conflict between an ethical value and a legal or procedural issue and often arose in the routine minutiae of dispensing prescriptions and selling medicines. Such ethical problems remained of concern for pharmacists and the commercial environment, corporate pharmacy ownership and pharmacists' subordination to doctors, all precipitated ethical problems. Law and ethics appeared to be understood synonymously but this may reflect a modernity that increasingly brackets out ethical experiences by encouraging reliance upon law and procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information about several papers discussed at several conferences on the training of pharmacists, clinical ethics in Great Britain, and ethical consultation is presented. The conference of Advancing the Provision of Pharmacy Law and Ethics Teaching discussed developments in pharmacy and the practice of pharmacy research. The Clinical Ethics Network discussed ethical concerns that arise in the treatment of patients.

The Human Tissue Act 2004 presents a radical change to the legal regulation of the use of human material in England and Wales. The Act presents a broad regulatory framework but much in the practical operation of the legislation will depend upon regulations to be enacted and a new Code of Practice. This article examines 'appropriate consent' for the use of human tissue for research purposes in the context of the living competent adult. It examines the provision of information as part of the consent process for the use of human materials for research purposes, the question of when consent can be withdrawn, and the controversial exception enabling the use without consent of anonymized material for research purposes where the research has been ethically approved. The paper concludes by highlighting some of the problems which may remain after the legislation comes into force. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK Genethics Club was established in November 2001 in order to provide a national forum of ethics support for the profession of clinical genetics in the UK. The forum brings together health professionals, medical ethicists and lawyers and support is provided through detailed discussion of cases and sharing of good practice. Clinical genetics professionals had previously voiced concerns about making extremely difficult ethical decisions, with profound implications, in something of a vacuum. Professionals saw a lack of guidance in the area and lack of time for discussion of difficult cases as reasons for this. This paper describes the origins of the group and gives (anonymized) examples of some of the types of issues discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information about several papers discussed at a conference held in June 2010 in Great Britain sponsored by the UK Clinical Ethics Network (UKCEN) on the ethical issues of disability in exercise is presented. Topics include a survey on the different concepts of disability, the ethics-oriented approaches of biomedical and clinical ethics, and the practical realities of living with disability. The conference featured several disabled persons, and campaigners.

Both the recent 'Warner' review of the UK research ethics committee (REC) system and the subsequent consultation document produced by the Central Office for Research Ethics Committees (COREC) emphasize the need to distinguish 'research' from what might be termed 'non-research'. This is to be determined through a process of filtering or 'triage', the intention being that RECs will avoid considering proposals with 'no material ethical issues'. In this paper we argue that trying to distinguish 'true' research from other projects is counterproductive, misleading and potentially unethical. Our case is built around three assertions: (1) the distinction between research and non-research is imprecise; (2) both medical research and non-research can generate similar ethical issues; and (3) projects should be judged according to what they involve, not how they are labelled. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]