Search

Social workers, physicians, and nurses from a major urban teaching hospital were assessed and compared regarding their attitudes toward the rationing of health care. Responses to eighteen statements of considered moral judgments in the rationing of health care resources were analyzed in terms of levels of agreement with each. All three professional groups rejected rationing based on patient age and socioeconomic worth. However, social workers and physicians were more likely than nurses to consider such factors as cost-benefit ratios, quality of life, relative strength of a patient's moral claim, and scarcity of resources in rationing decisions. Study findings appear to portray social workers and physicians as being more utilitarian and nurses more egalitarian in rationing decisions. Implications for practice in a managed care environment are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hospital social workers (N = 255) from ten urban teaching hospitals in seven states were surveyed regarding their practice responses and training needs in bioethics. Responses to twenty-one practice situations in bioethics were analyzed in terms of levels of encountering ethical concerns, clinical participation and preparedness to handle ethical concerns. Whereas worker responses were greater in practice situations appearing more psychosocial than biomedical in nature, training needs were greater in those situations appearing more biomedical than psychosocial in nature. Rationing of health care, the number one training need across service specialities, stands out as the practice situation in which ethical concerns were encountered with the least preparation and participation. Prior training in ethical principles and analysis and service on a hospital ethics committee associated significantly with higher levels of worker responses. Implications for social work education and practice in today's health care environment are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]