Search

Background: Patient participation in clinical ethics support services (CESS) has been marked as an important issue. There seems to be a wide variety of practices globally, but extensive theoretical or empirical studies on the matter are missing. Scarce publications indicate that, in Europe, patient participation in CESS (fused and abbreviated hereafter as: PP) varies from region to region, and per type of support. Practices vary from being non-existent, to patients being a full conversation partner. This contrasts with North America, where PP seems more or less standard. While PP seems to be on the rise in Europe, there is no data to confirm this. This study sought a deep understanding of both habits and the attitudes towards PP in the Netherlands, including respondents' practical and normative perspectives on the matter., Methods and Results: We developed a national survey on PP for Dutch CESS staff. Our survey comprised a total of 25 open and close-ended questions, focused on four topics related to PP (1) goals of CESS, (2) status quo of PP, (3) ideas and ideals concerning PP, and (4) obstacles for PP., Discussion: The four most important findings were that: (1) Patient participation in Dutch CESS is far from standard. (2) Views on patient participation are very much intertwined with the goals of ethics support. (3) Hesitations, fears and perceived obstacles for PP were not on principle and (4) Most respondents see PP as a positive opportunity, yet requiring additional training, practical guidance and experience., Conclusions: Various normative reasons require PP. However, PP seems far from standard and somewhat rare in Dutch CESS settings. Our respondents did not raise many principled objections to PP. Instead, reasons for the lack of PP are intertwined with viewpoints on the goals of CESS, which seemingly focus on supporting health care professionals (HCPs). Training and practical guidance was thought to be helpful for gaining experience for both CESS staff and HCPs., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

To date, healthcare ethics committees (HEC) have been the only ethics consultation model in the hospital setting in Spain, though their usefulness for ethical conflict resolution in daily practice has been questioned. Individual clinical ethics consultation (CEC) is a complementary ethics consultation model, which has proved efficacious in real-time ethical problem-solving. Although CEC is widely used in North America, its implementation in Europe is still marginal. In this document we present the general characteristics of CEC services, comparing their potential advantages and risks to those of HECs. We will then share relevant European experiences in CEC, as well as review the few CEC initiatives in Spain. Finally, we will share our recent CEC implementation strategy in a national, medium-sized, teaching hospital. We will summarise the minimum requirements that such a CEC service must meet in order to carry out its consulting activity: organisational flexibility, well-trained professionals, with sufficient clinical experience, economical support, and organisational dependency on HECs.

This article examines injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment (iOAT), in which patients suffering from long-term, treatment refractory opioid use disorder (OUD) are prescribed injectable diacetylmorphine, the active ingredient of heroin. While iOAT is part of the continuum of care for OUD in some European countries and in some parts of Canada, it is not an available treatment in the United States. We suggest that one reason for this situation is the belief that a genuine treatment for substance use disorder cannot prescribe the same substance as that used. We examine possible rationales for this belief by considering four combinations of views on the constitutive causal basis of substance use disorders and the definition of effective treatment. We show that all but one combination counts iOAT as a genuine treatment and that there are good reasons to reject the one that does not. Specifically, we claim that medical interventions, such as iOAT, that significantly reduce the severity of a disorder deserve to be categorized as effective treatments and regarded as such in practice.

Background: There is a lack of empirical research regarding the outcomes of such clinical ethics support methods as moral case deliberation (MCD). Empirical research in how healthcare professionals perceive potential outcomes is needed in order to evaluate the value and effectiveness of ethics support; and help to design future outcomes research. The aim was to use the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcome Instrument (Euro-MCD) instrument to examine the importance of various MCD outcomes, according to healthcare professionals, prior to participation., Methods: A North European field survey among healthcare professionals drawn from 73 workplaces in a variety of healthcare settings in the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. The Euro-MCD instrument was used., Results: All outcomes regarding the domains of moral reflexivity, moral attitude, emotional support, collaboration, impact at organisational level and concrete results, were perceived as very or quite important by 76%-97% of the 703 respondents. Outcomes regarding collaboration and concrete results were perceived as most important. Outcomes assessed as least important were mostly about moral attitude. 'Better interactions with patient/family' emerged as a new domain from the qualitative analysis. Dutch respondents perceived most of the outcomes as significantly less important than the Scandinavians, especially regarding emotional support. Furthermore, men, those who were younger, and physician-respondents scored most of the outcomes as statistically significantly less important compared with the other respondents., Conclusions: The findings indicate a need for a broad instrument such as the Euro-MCD. Outcomes related to better interactions between professionals and patients must also be included in the future. The empirical findings raise the normative question of whether outcomes that were perceived as less important, such as moral reflexivity and moral attitude outcomes, should still be included. In the future, a combination of empirical findings (practice) and normative reflection (theories) will contribute to the revision of the instrument., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Clinical ethics support, in particular Moral Case Deliberation, aims to support health care providers to manage ethically difficult situations. However, there is a lack of evaluation instruments regarding outcomes of clinical ethics support in general and regarding Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) in particular. There also is a lack of clarity and consensuses regarding which MCD outcomes are beneficial. In addition, MCD outcomes might be context-sensitive. Against this background, there is a need for a standardised but flexible outcome evaluation instrument. The aim of this study was to develop a multi-contextual evaluation instrument measuring health care providers' experiences and perceived importance of outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation., Methods: A multi-item instrument for assessing outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) was constructed through an iterative process, founded on a literature review and modified through a multistep review by ethicists and health care providers. The instrument measures perceived importance of outcomes before and after MCD, as well as experienced outcomes during MCD and in daily work. A purposeful sample of 86 European participants contributed to a Delphi panel and content validity testing. The Delphi panel (n = 13), consisting of ethicists and ethics researchers, participated in three Delphi-rounds. Health care providers (n = 73) participated in the content validity testing through 'think-aloud' interviews and a method using Content Validity Index., Results: The development process resulted in the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes Instrument (Euro-MCD), which consists of two sections, one to be completed before a participant's first MCD and the other after completing multiple MCDs. The instrument contains a few open-ended questions and 26 specific items with a corresponding rating/response scale representing various MCD outcomes. The items were categorised into the following six domains: Enhanced emotional support, Enhanced collaboration, Improved moral reflexivity, Improved moral attitude, Improvement on organizational level and Concrete results., Conclusions: A tentative instrument has been developed that seems to cover main outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation. The next step will be to test the Euro-MCD in a field study.

Unlabelled: End of life decisions affect most of patients in intensive care units, thus, it is important to know both local and international practice in accordance with law and ethical principles for intensive care physicians., Aim: To search for local customs of end of life decisions (withholding or withdrawing the therapy, shortening of the dying process), and to compare the data with the international literature., Methods: In 2007-2008 the first Hungarian survey was performed with the purpose to learn more about local practice of end of life decisions. Questionnaires were sent out electronically to 743 registered members of Hungarian Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care. Respecting anonymity, 103 replies were statistically evaluated (response rate was 13.8%) and compared with data from other European countries., Results: As expected, it turned out from replies that the practice of domestic intensive care physicians is very paternal and this is promoted by legal regulations that share a similar character. Intensive care physicians generally make their decisions alone (3.75/5 point) without respecting the opinion of the patient (2.57/5 point) the relatives (2.14/5 point) or other medical personnel (2.37/5 point). Furthermore, they prefer not to start a therapy rather than withdraw an ongoing treatment. Nevertheless, the frequency of end of life decisions (3-9% of ICU patients) is smaller than other European countries., Conclusions: There is a need for the expansion of patients' right in our country. For end of life decisions, self determinations must be supported and a dialogue must be established between lawmakers and physicians, in order to improve the legal support of this medical practice.

Scientists working on an obesity intervention project were asked questions, via questionnaire and interviews, relating to ethical and public-policy aspects of tackling childhood obesity. The main areas of enquiry concerned elements responsible for the rise in childhood obesity, key ethical areas of obesity interventions, helpfulness and effectiveness of policy measures, socioeconomic factors, and media coverage and political debate. Key results from this indicate that: there is disagreement about the amount of information about the causes of obesity that is needed before implementing interventions; an improvement in health and nutrition education of both children and adults through positive messages is seen as highly desirable; scientists regard environment, rather than genetics, as playing the major role in rising obesity levels; the level of individual responsibility being placed on parents and children may be unfair and unhelpful; whole-system, long-term and sensitive policy actions are needed rather than relying on quick fixes such as miracle pills; and there are country-specific issues related to rising obesity levels that need to be considered, though the respondents tended to have a great deal of faith in EU-wide interventions.

Background: Many decisions in neonatology are complex and demanding. Consequently, the involved persons can expect guidance which is provided to them by specialist organisations of the scientific community. Their documents deal with such substantial questions as how to treat extremely premature newborns and severely ill infants. They also address procedural aspects of the decision-making process; however, they could be made more transparent in this respect., Objective: This paper aims to address those factors which may facilitate or hinder the neonatal decision-making process; regarding the legal framework, the countries Germany, Austria, and Switzerland are in the focus of this analysis. Thus, transparency, clarity, and predictability of the decision-making shall be enhanced., Results: The following components of the decision-making process will be addressed: decisional framework factors, decision makers, decision types, decision steps, and decision consequences. Emphasis is placed on a compact visualisation of the process in order to communicate it more easily to younger team members., Conclusions: Good decision making in neonatology must be context sensitive. General guidelines can be a helpful resource for carefully developing such a process. By taking the factors described in this paper into consideration, this task will be completed more efficiently., (Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart.New York.)

Purpose of Review: Frequently, ICU patients lack the capacity to share discussions and make decisions about their health. Designation of a surrogate and advance directives have been proposed to empower patients and give more place to their autonomy. Even though legitimacy of surrogates is now recognized by physicians, patients' management must take into account new legislations emphasizing patients' autonomy all over Europe., Recent Findings: Over the last decade, most western European countries have recognized the validity of advance directives and the process of substitute decision making when a patient is incapacitated. Although the laws of these countries reflect the same approach, there are several differences in the mode of designation of surrogates and in their decisional authority., Summary: The present review compares the legal framework of surrogacy in Belgium, Denmark, England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland. France is the country that confers the weakest power to surrogates in decision making. Patients' competence and the ability of surrogate decision makers to cope with ICU's burden are discussed as the main limitations of the substitute decision-making process. Measures to improve substitute decision making and to limit harmful repercussions are suggested.

In this article, we use the principlist approach to identify, analyse and attempt to solve the ethical problem raised by a pregnant woman's request for cesarean delivery in absence of medical indications. We use two different types of premises: factual (facts about cesarean delivery and specifically attitudes of obstetricians as derived from the EUROBS European study) and value premises (principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, respect for autonomy and justice).Beneficence/non-maleficence entails physicians' responsibility to minimise harms and maximise benefits. Avoiding its inherent risks makes a prima facie case against cesarean section without medical indication. However, as vaginal delivery can have unintended consequences, there is a need to balance the somewhat dissimilar risks and benefits. The principle of autonomy poses a challenge in case of disagreement between the pregnant woman and the physician. Improved communication aimed to enable better informed choice may overcome some instances of disagreement. The principle of justice prohibits unfair discrimination, and broadly favours optimising resource utilisation. Available evidence supports vaginal birth in uncomplicated term pregnancies as the standard of care. The principlist approach offered a useful framework for ethical analysis of cesarean delivery on maternal request, identified the rights and duties of those involved, and helped reach a conclusion, although conflict at the individual level may remain challenging.

Objective: To explore the clinical staff attitudes towards ethical decision making in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Ireland, to establish differences between doctors and nurses and to compare attitudes in Ireland with those in Europe., Design: Cross-sectional study by means of an anonymous questionnaire. 64 doctors and 228 nurses in seven NICUs participated (response rates 74% and 81%, respectively). Through factor analysis the staff answers to 12 attitude statements were used to build a score whose range varied from 0 (preservation of life in any case) to 10, indicating a more individualised approach according to the patient's best interests., Main Outcome Measure: Staff attitudes to ethical decision making in NICU., Results: Mean values of attitude scores were 5.8 (95% CI 5.3 to 6.2) for doctors, and 6.0 (95% CI 5.5 to 6.5) for nurses. Respondents with experience in follow-up of NICU graduates had significantly higher scores (6.7 vs 5.4, p = 0.018), while the opposite was true among more religious staff (5.8 vs 6.9, p = 0.026) and particularly for minority religions such as Muslim (4.1, 95% CI 3.1 to 5.2). Scores were higher after age 30 for nurses, and after age 40 for doctors, suggesting the adoption of a less vitalistic viewpoint as respondents grow older and more experienced. Among doctors, a relationship was found between the attitude score and their self-reported non-treatment practices., Conclusions: In Ireland, NICU doctors and nurses hold similar attitudes towards ethical decision making. Personal and professional factors have a statistically significant impact on attitude score. Compared with the rest of Europe, attitudes in Ireland appear more similar to those of southern rather than northern European countries.

In an international survey of rationing we have found that European physicians encounter scarcity-related ethical difficulties, and are dissatified with the resolution of many of these cases. Here we further examine survey results to explore whether ethics support services would be potentially useful in addressing scarcity related ethical dilemmas. Results indicate that while the type of help offered by ethics support services was considered helpful by physicians, they rarely referred difficulties regarding scarcity to ethics consultation. We propose that ethics consultants could assist physicians by making the process less difficult, and by contributing to decisions being more ethically justifiable. Expertise in bringing considerations of justice to bear on real cases could also be useful in recognising an unjust limit, as opposed to a merely frustrating limit. Though these situations are unlikely to be among the most frequently referred to ethics support services, ethics consultants should be prepared to address them.

Withdrawing life-supporting technology from patients who are irremediably ill is morally troubling for caregivers, patients, and families. Interventions that enable clinicians to delay death create situations in which the dignity and comfort of dying patients may be sacrificed to spare professionals and families from their elemental fear of death. Understanding of the limits of treatment, expertise in palliation of symptoms, skillful communication, and careful orchestration of controllable events can help to manage the withdrawal of life support appropriately.

Background: Ethics support services are growing in Europe to help doctors in dealing with ethical difficulties. Currently, insufficient attention has been focused on the experiences of doctors who have faced ethical difficulties in these countries to provide an evidence base for the development of these services., Methods: A survey instrument was adapted to explore the types of ethical dilemma faced by European doctors, how they ranked the difficulty of these dilemmas, their satisfaction with the resolution of a recent ethically difficult case and the types of help they would consider useful. The questionnaire was translated and given to general internists in Norway, Switzerland, Italy and the UK., Results: Survey respondents (n=656, response rate 43%) ranged in age from 28 to 82 years, and averaged 25 years in practice. Only a minority (17.6%) reported having access to ethics consultation in individual cases. The ethical difficulties most often reported as being encountered were uncertain or impaired decision-making capacity (94.8%), disagreement among caregivers (81.2%) and limitation of treatment at the end of life (79.3%). The frequency of most ethical difficulties varied among countries, as did the type of issue considered most difficult. The types of help most often identified as potentially useful were professional reassurance about the decision being correct (47.5%), someone capable of providing specific advice (41.1%), help in weighing outcomes (36%) and clarification of the issues (35.9%). Few of the types of help expected to be useful varied among countries., Conclusion: Cultural differences may indeed influence how doctors perceive ethical difficulties. The type of help needed, however, did not vary markedly. The general structure of ethics support services would not have to be radically altered to suit cultural variations among the surveyed countries.

The perinatal phase coincides, at its onset (22nd-23rd week of gestation, according to common acknowledgment), with the possible beginning of a extrauterine life susceptible of protraction. The 1st, for some the 4th, week of neonatal life marks the conclusion of the perinatal phase. There are several reasons to burden this period, to which a complex World Health Organization (WHO) document for Europe was dedicated in November 2000, with ethical issues. The profound immaturity that characterizes these extremely low weight newborns, of an approximate weight of 500 g, influences the poor survival prognosis (especially for those born within the 24th week), as well as the limitations concerning quality of life, often severe. Neonates born earlier than the 23rd week are at extreme risk, and rouse critical considerations regarding the choice of a health care program. A close monitoring of pregnancies at risk of premature termination, and a careful program of medical care for these extremely pre-terms, progressively implemented in the last 10-15 years, have given consistent results, reported in surveys of recent publication. From an ethical point of view, the problem of limitations within or beyond which to stretch intensive care interventions in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) is still crucial, being the orientation between rational and emotional a difficult issue. Guidelines or behaviour proposals, variable with time and manifold in different countries, are reported. Naturally, the communication of a severe diagnosis to parents of a newborn even if not preterm-born falls also under the ethical issues of the perinatal period.

Reproductive cloning has thrown up new scientific possibilities, ethical conundrums, and legal challenges. An initial question, considered by the English courts in 2003, was whether the technique presently available, that of cell nucleus replacement, falls outside the provisions of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. If it does, the creation and use, including use in research protocols, of human embryos would be unregulated, disclosing a need to consider remedial legislation. The resolution by the courts of this legal question dramatically engages them in a resolution of fundamental ethical dilemmas, and discloses the possibilities and limitation of negotiating science policy through the processes of litigation.

The author has discussed the procedures of the Bioethical Commission of a biomedical research assessment and clinical trials based on analysis of the directives of the European Commission. Particularly criticized was the omission of the role of local committees in the case of the multi-center studies. Also underlined was a necessity to inform the examined persons, in a wider and more understandable fashion, about an essence of the examination and the expected level of risk.

Contemporary awareness of bioethical norms in treatment and research experiments in medicine underwent a long evolution in Poland. The process was similar to that of other countries developing this kind of research. The negative experiences of World War II resulted in tendency to curb experimentation on humans. The seventies witnessed a heated discussion leading to settlement of this problem. The argument was that stringent limitations on such experiments would stop the development of new, indispensable drugs. This discussion also reached Poland where the majority of participants were doctors and lawyers expressing their views mostly in the press. This led in consequence to the establishment of the first ethical norms in medical experiment on humans. These were expressed in subsequent codes of ethics for the medical profession as well as in the founding of the first bioethical commissions at medical schools. Currently such norms based on the so-called "good clinical practice" standards were incorporated in the legal acts that establish bioethical committees at medical schools and other medical institutes. This paper also presents some specific aspects of research on female patients.

Hungary joined the Ovideo Treaty (a bioethical health agreement signed by EU countries in 1997), as declared by Law Nr. VI in 2002. In July 1 2002 two departmental orders were enacted: departmental order Nr. [23/2002 (V. 9.)] about the biomedical research in humans and departmental order Nr. [24/2002 (V. 9.)] about the human use and clinical trials of investigational products and the adaptation of Good Clinical Practice (GCP). Both were based on the Health Law. The departmental order on the Medical Research Council [(16/2001 (IV. 28.)] together with these two orders contains the national rules of biomedical research performed in Hungary and also the Hungarian adaptation of various, bioethical principles and directives published by EU or other internationally accepted organisations. According to these regulations from 2002 biomedical research in Hungary could be in agreement with the Oviedo Treaty. Ethical approval and supervision can be obtained from research ethical committees of three types: central, regional and local superimposed upon one another. There are three, central, ethical committees within the frames of the Medical Research Council with national responsibility: Scientific and Research Ethical Committee, Clinical Pharmacological Ethical Committee, Human Reproduction Committee. In some cases regional research ethical committees are entitled to hand out ethical approval and ethical supervision. In those research sites, where the regional research ethical committee is not existent a local committee should be organized for the local ethical control of the research investigations and experiments. This way the ethical requirements and clinical practice by the GCP can be performed in clinical research in Hungary with a special respect to the vulnerable persons possibly involved. The paper gives an overview on recent developments and major ethical principles of the Hungarian biomedical research.

The debate and implementation of Clinical Ethics Consultation (CEC) is still in its beginnings in Europe and the issue of the patient's perspective has been neglected so far, especially at the theoretical and methodological level. At the practical level, recommendations about the involvement of the patient or his/her relatives are missing, reflecting the general lack of quality and practice standards in CEC. Balance of perspectives is a challenge in any interpersonal consultation, which has led to great efforts to develop "technical" approaches, e.g., in psychological counseling or psychotherapeutic treatment. In ethics, unbalance or partiality is a matter of justice and has provoked significant theoretical work, also relevant for practical medical ethics. A lack of balance seems to be particularly serious in those situations, where ethical conflict is triggering a consultation and where the "parties" involved may try to persuade the consultant that their particular opinion is the most convincing; but to our knowledge the connection between patient/relatives involvement and balance has not yet been discussed in the context of CEC. Central questions of access and involvement of the patient and his/her relatives will be analysed and discussed regarding the challenge of balance and the adequate role or attitude of a Clinical Ethics Consultant. It is argued that the Clinical Ethics Consultant should have a methodological awareness regarding the concepts of "neutrality" versus "advocacy" in his/her role and try to achieve a balanced procedure that allows for an optimum of change of perspectives. The argumentation is developed along the narrative of a real case study. Recommendations concerning the involvement of (the perspectives of) the patient or the relatives are formulated for the practice of CEC.

The responsibility for reports about drug trials in medical journals should lie with the clinicians in the steering committee, not with the industrial sponsor. Examples of undue influence of sponsors on the conduct and analysis are the choice of surrogate outcome events, changes in the protocol during the trial, discontinuation of the study, post hoc analyses and suppression of publication. Since this essay was written, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors ("Vancouver Group") has issued the condition that authors of submitted manuscripts should guarantee their independence in data analysis and reporting. Nevertheless, this "security check" occurs at a late stage and may not apply to journals that are less well known. Institutional Review Boards should routinely take the matter of independence into account. Also, European guidelines should be rewritten to reflect these fundamental issues rather than a multitude of details. In fact not sponsors or physicians but patients and the general public are the true owners of trial data., (Copyright 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel)

The utilization of partial-liver grafts for transplantation of adults represents an evolution from strategies designed to increase pediatric organ supply that have been justified by increased organ-waiting times and morbidity of adult transplant candidates. These techniques, which include adult-to-adult living-donor and split-liver transplantation, mandate particular surgical and medical considerations, as partial-liver grafts predispose to unique complications resulting from anatomic variations, technical considerations, and recipient physiology. Adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation has been successfully reported throughout the world; however, the magnitude of the donor operation has resulted in serious morbidity and donor mortality that have stimulated an ethical debate as to the future of this procedure. The limitations encountered in the application of adult-to-adult, living-donor liver transplantation have renewed interest in the successful implementation of split-liver transplantation between two adults from one adult cadaver donor. This manuscript details current technical considerations for the performance of adult-to-adult living-donor and split-liver transplantation, summarizes current outcomes, and explores the ethical dilemma of living-donation.

Clinical emergencies necessitate immediate action to avert the danger to the patient's life or health. Emergency patients might be in greatest need of novel therapies, and even presumed willing to assume some risk, but research into emergency conditions should be conducted under commonly accepted principles that fulfil the scientific, ethical, and legal criteria. Such criteria already exist in the US, but are still under development in Europe. This article introduces criteria upon which trials in emergency settings may be ethically and legally justified in Europe. Based on both legal texts and professional guidelines, the author has established seven conditions for emergency research, of which informed consent and its substitutes, as well as the conditions of direct benefit requirement and necessity, are considered most problematic and therefore analysed more closely. Other conditions include absence of alternative methods, scientific validity, and approval by an ethics committee.

The scope of this essay is to introduce and explain the methodology underlying the Lanza Foundation Protocol for the analysis of clinical cases. The essay is divided in three parts. Part one examines the Protocol's methodology within the whole evolutionary framework of argumentation in bioethics. Particular attention is given to the most significant methodologies developed in European bioethics. Part two describes the system of argumentation which serves as a frame for both approaches, namely, the normative and the hermeneutical. Finally, the third part presents in an analytic fashion the operations which define the Protocol itself. The Protocol is the result of an interdisciplinary effort and it provides a detailed grid for analyzing and tackling the ethical components of clinical cases. The Protocol is primarily directed toward Ethics Committees in their consulting activity, yet it has been proven of considerable importance at an educational level also, particular in continuing education programs for health care professionals.

Truly professional medical ethics requires a methodology that generates both moral discernment and consistently right judgments. In this article the author briefly reviews difficulties involved in ethical decision-making, the historical development of casuistry, and four ethical methodologies employed in clinical medicine today. These latter, which are outlined and compared, are as follows: the methodology developed by David Thomasma in the 1960s and 1970s; one created by Jonsen, Siegler, and Winslade; another developed by the author; and the Bochum Protocol authored by Hans-Martin Sass et al. of the Bochum Center for Medical Ethics in the Federal Republic of Germany.