Search

Copyright of Die Gynäkologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Die Gynäkologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Kant-Studien is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Aus juristischer Perspektive sind Max Webers Idealtypen des vom Systemgedanken geprägten kontinentaleuropäischen Rechtsdenkens und der eher kasuistisch vorgehenden angelsächsischen Praxis hilfreich. Sie können in eine interne Sprache, wie sie die juristischen Methodenlehren verwenden, übersetzt werden. Auch können die jeweiligen Vor- und Nachteile der beiden Vorgehensweisen kombiniert werden, um am Ende eine systematische und kasuistisch ausgearbeitete Rechtspraxis zu gewährleisten. Doch nur wenige Rechtswissenschaftler rezipierten zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts Max Weber. Eine bemerkenswerte Ausnahme bildeten die zeitgenössischen Vertreter des sog. Freirechts, insbesondere H. Kantorowicz. Er sah die Vorzüge einer extern beobachtenden soziologischen Methode und entwickelte eine trialistische Methodologie, wonach die jeweilige juristische Dogmatik intern den Sinn der Gesetze festlegt, während Rechtsgeschichte und Rechtssoziologie extern beobachten. Die Rechtsphilosophie sollte werturteilsfrei die verschiedenen Haltungen darstellen und die unterschiedlichen normativen Bewertungen systematisch vergleichen. System und Kasuistik sind danach die beiden grundlegenden Kategorien der Jurisprudenz. Systematisierung ist die Basis, aber aus dem jeweiligen System folgt nicht die praktische Entscheidung. Sie haben letztlich einen theoretisch nicht determinierbaren dezisionistischen Anteil. Wegen dieser Erkenntnis wurde Kantorowicz und seine relativistische Rechtstheorie heftig kritisiert. Ihre Vertreter wurden als „Freirechtler" disziplinär ausgegrenzt. Diese hartnäckige Ablehnung des letztlich dezisionistischen Charakters der Rechtspraxis, die auch in der kontinentalen Rechtskultur unvermeidbar ist, erschwerte eine offene Beschäftigung mit Max Webers rechtssoziologischen Schriften und erklärt auch, wieso die Max Weber-Forschung eine Domäne der Soziologie ist. From a legal perspective, Max Weber's ideal types of continental European legal thinking, which is characterised by systemic thinking, and the more casuistic approach of Anglo-Saxon practice are helpful. They can be translated into the internal language used by legal methodologies. The respective advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches can also be combined to ensure a systematic and casuistic legal practice in the end. However, only a few legal scholars at the beginning of the 20th century took Max Weber on board. The contemporary representatives of so-called free law, in particular H. Kantorowicz, were a notable exception. He saw the advantages of an externally observing sociological method and developed a trialist methodology, according to which the respective legal dogmatics determined the meaning of the laws internally, while legal history and legal sociology observed externally. The philosophy of law should present the different attitudes without value judgement and systematically compare the different normative assessments. System and casuistry are then the two fundamental categories of jurisprudence. Systematisation is the basis, but the practical decision does not follow from the respective system. Ultimately, they have a theoretically indeterminable, decisionistic component. Kantorowicz and his relativist theory of law were heavily criticised for this insight. Its representatives were ostracised as "free lawyers". This stubborn rejection of the ultimately decisionist character of legal practice, which is also unavoidable in continental legal culture, made it difficult to engage openly with Max Weber's sociological writings on law and also explains why research on Max Weber remains the domain of sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do institutions think about change? Building on Mary Douglas's famous contention that institutions think by means of analogy, we suggest that institutions think about change by means of irony. Irony is pronounced during times of profound change when the rhetoric and the reality of change can be inconsistent. We show that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has enacted what we term loosely coupled change—change in which symbolic meanings and material practices are only weakly connected and retain their independence. The CCP employed the rhetorical form of irony, known as casuistry, to legitimize a change to market systems as being incremental while in practice radically adopting market systems and dismantling socialist practices. We contribute to research on institutional messaging by examining the hermeneutic depth of casuistry. We also contribute to research on organizational change by explicating how casuistry reconciles contradictory ideologies and facilitates loosely coupled change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of FinanzRundschau is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article focuses on Professor Dov Fox's proposal for "Medical Disobedience" in the context of the medical profession's response to controversial issues like abortion. Topics include the historical evolution of conscience claims, the distinction between medical and civil disobedience, and the challenges posed by expanding ideas of complicity in shaping medical practice and law.

Coercive measures to protect public health are controversial, eliciting questions regarding state-patient relationships and conflicts between individual autonomy and public good. This is challenging in a time when respect for patient autonomy has become elevated yet society faces an increasing number of public health challenges, the most recent being the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19). In that context, there is emphasis on increasing vaccination rates internationally in order to achieve "herd immunity", raising the possibility of compulsory vaccination of populations in the future. Here, we explore current rights of individuals to decline vaccination, utilising prior learning from other viral pathogens internationally (specifically, measles, mumps and rubella), and related public health outcomes. Further, we consider freedom of choice versus mandatory treatment necessitated to avoid contagion during disease outbreaks (such as COVID-19). In doing so, we utilise rhetorical reasoning in the form of casuistry focusing on the core challenges regarding public good versus personal antipathy towards vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Holy Scriptures can be considered a specific kind of normative texts, whose use to assess practical moral cases requires interpretation. In the field of ethics, this interpretative problem results in the necessity of bridging the gap between the normative source – moral precepts – and the specific cases. In the history of the Church, this problem was the core of the so-called casuistry, namely the decision-making practice consisting in applying the Commandments and other principles of the Holy Scriptures to specific cases or moral problems. By taking into account the sin of lying, this paper argues that casuistic texts reveal an extremely sophisticated interpretative method, grounded on "pragmatic" contextual and communicative considerations and argumentative structures that resemble the ones used in legal interpretation. These works show how the underspecified biblical text expressing an abstract norm was enriched pragmatically by completing it and modulating its meaning so that it could be used to draw a conclusion in a specific context on a specific case. The mutual interdependence between biblical interpretation, pragmatics, and argumentation sheds light on a much broader phenomenon, namely the pragmatic nature of argumentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Citizen science (CS) has been presented as a novel form of research relevant for social concerns and global challenges. CS transforms the roles of participants to being actively involved at various stages of research processes, CS projects are dynamic, and pluralism arises when many non-professional researchers take an active involvement in research. Some argue that these elements all make existing research ethical principles and regulations ill-suited for guiding responsible CS conduct. However, while many have sought to highlight such challenges from CS, few have discussed principles per se providing the foundation for regulations. In this article we will investigate the possibilities of midlevel principlism in guiding responsible CS conduct. Principlism has the potential of accommodating many of the concerns taken to reduce the relevance of existing principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the meaning of the term species in Justinian’s Digest. It considers the uniqueness to the jurisprudential meaning of this concept in the works of the classical Roman jurists and how this meaning rivals that of the theory of forms derived from dialectical and classificatory methods found in Greek philosophy. The paper, offering a reading of fragments of the Digest, argues that the word species refers there to the product of a casuistic approach to jurisprudence, interested in the ‘juridical morphology’ of cases as well as objects. Such species are shown to ‘repeal’ rather than reproduce the taxonomy of general laws and generic classes, pursuing a thought that is at odds with the aim of a ‘general’ jurisprudence. It is hoped that this paper may help point to new approaches to studying the relationship between legal institution and the life sciences, drawing attention to the limitation for legal thought in a dominant biological understanding of the species-concept.

The consideration of the material or the moral object in determining the nature of sin, is fundamental in the Christian tradition. Moral theology has focused mainly on the sexual sphere, where non datur parvitas materiae. The idea of the object in the nature of sin in general, is less explored. This article aims to investigate this very aspect, to understand how the moral object has been understood in history and what its role has been in determining the seriousness of sin. This first part, mainly historical in nature, reaches up to the modern era. The research shows how, from the very beginning, the moral object essentially refers to the act, although to some extent, the need to also introduce the agent appears in the explanation of the nature of the moral object itself. Conceptually, it avoids reducing object to the physical quantity of the action, but, on a casuistic level, the profile of object seems rather physical in nature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The health risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have changed daily life tremendously. Many are uncertain how to respond due to conflicting advice from authorities, and the practical difficulties inherent in protecting human health while sustaining the economy. The Anglican tradition offers a moral framework, practical principles, and a method of public engagement to address the challenges of COVID-19. Kenneth Kirk provides a framework of virtue and spiritual practices and a method of moral reasoning that resolves problems of conscience. William Temple develops principles of love, justice, human dignity, the common good, and the preferential option for the vulnerable that can be applied to concrete cases. Nigel Biggar and Pauli Murray show how to engage the public from an Anglican perspective to spark conversations and create structures that address the pandemic. The result is flexible guidance that can be tailored to the needs of particular persons and communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines how Catholic moral theologians analysed the constraints imposed by the rights of the dead to their good name on historical writing and research. The concern of Catholic moral theologians for persons' rights to their good name coupled with their concern for the rights of dead persons placed serious moral constraints on the work of historians. At the same time, from very early on, these moral theologians showed appreciation of the benefits of historical writing, including writing on the less public aspects of historical figures. The general tendency was to allow historians some moral elbow room. There was, however, a clear red line: what was and had always been secret could not be revealed, regardless of the benefits. By the end of the nineteenth century, the authors of the casuist manualists revised the traditional doctrine and removed the moral red line that had been accepted until then. Historians could now reveal what had always been secret. This doctrinal development was the result of two historical events: the opening of the Vatican Archives and allowing propagandists and journalists within politically organized Catholic conservatism to fight as equals in the printed media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Estebanillo González is the last Spanish picaresque novel, but its eponymous protagonist rarely features in the discussions on the genre in the way other male characters, Lazarillo, Guzmán or Pablos do. In this article, drawing on earlier literary criticism and historical research concerning religious diasporas in Early Modern Europe, I offer a new analysis of the protagonist's possible converso origins. The protagonist's attitude towards his alleged hidalguía questions the relevance of social status. In the second part of the article, I argue that behind the protagonist's jokes and puns hides religious scepticism aimed in particular at Counter-Reformation techniques of casuistry. Both hidalguía and Catholic practices, fundamental aspects of Spanish society, are therefore undermined. Estebanillo, as the last picaro, offers his own original vision of the self in the world and as such should join the picaresque trio. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical use of prescription opioids has steadily increased since the 1990s, particularly in the U.S.A. and Canada, along with abuse of these substances and significant increases in rates of addiction and death related to prescription opioids. The American authorities speak of an "addiction epidemic" and are launching a series of countermeasures to better address the problem. In Europe, there is an increasing use of prescription opioids and related problems, but the European context is much less dramatic than the American and Canadian ones. Nevertheless, based on the data, it cannot be ruled out that a similar crisis will occur on the Old Continent. The aim of this study is to analyze the Italian context to better understand whether there is a possibility of an addiction epidemic. Twenty-four cases of death of people under treatment with prescription opioids have been retrospectively analyzed. Toxicological samples were collected with routine methods during the autopsy, followed by systematic screening for substances by diverse methods. Volatile compounds were identified using gas chromatography-flame ionization detection (GC-FID). Medical drugs and drugs of abuse were identified via the use of gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS). Of a total of 24 subjects, 14 died due to an overdose of Tramadol, while 7 died due to an overdose of Buprenorphine and 3 dues to a Fentanyl overdose. The most used drug was Tramadol. Histological examination was performed with hematoxylin/eosin staining, though no significant findings emerged apart from widespread edema and focal sclerosis of the myocardium, and interstitial and alveolar edema of the lungs. Our data show that attention must be paid to prescription opioids. European institutions, as soon as possible, must implement preventive measures that avoid the recurrence of the North American situation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Edad de Oro is the property of Departamento de Filologia Espanola de la Universidad Autonoma de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this Philological Conversation , Carlo Ginzburg reflects on the place of philology in his work and explores the connections between philology, microhistory, and casuistry. We talk about the people who inspired his early thinking, including his father Leone Ginzburg, his mother Natalia, and his grandfather, moving on to Erich Auerbach, Leo Spitzer, and Sebastiano Timpanaro. We discuss the ethical and political implications of his research and reflect on the power of philology to give voice to the marginalized and suppressed. The conversation, which was edited for readability, took place during the Corona pandemic over three meetings via Zoom on July 13, September 10, and September 17, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interest in the role of casuistry and casuistical questions in Kant's Doctrine of Virtue (DV), i.e. the second part of the Metaphysics of Morals, has grown in recent years. My own position is formulated in Schuessler (2012, in German), the main thesis of which will be retained here in an updated form and with some shifts of emphasis. I hold that the casuistical questions concerning perfect duties in the DV are not intended to represent casuistry in Kant's sense. Casuistry and casuistical questions are neither equivalent in the DV nor do they serve the same purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A modern theory of casuistry has not been developed or paid much attention to in legal scholarship in Europe lately, since the partial failure of Viehweg to reintroduce the casuistic (topical) approach in 1950s. Yet, the related problems have not withered away and even today many legal professionals (attorneys and judges alike) still face the same dilemmas as already the medieval confessors and casuists did. This contribution thus ponders upon the question as to whether any new solid theory of legal casuistry – building either on the casuistry employed by theologians and confessors, or casuistry employed nowadays by ethicists, especially in bioethics – can be helpful to modern continental lawyers, who are used rather to systematic instead of casuistic thinking, but still either doubt the one-right-answer theory, or find themselves in a situation of legal uncertainty for whichever reason.

Although the theological contexts of St. Alphonsus de Liguori and Pope Francis are very different in both their historical and methodological aspects, they have been following a down-to-earth, person-centred approach in proposing moral solutions to pastoral issues. While for both of them general moral norms are indispensable indicators of objective morality it is the conscience of persons (informed by those moral norms) in their proper contexts that has the ultimate priority in arriving at moral solutions. The common hermeneutical key to their respective pastoral/moral approaches is to take the moral agent in his/her lived context seriously. Consequently, one cannot expect the same uniform pastoral solution to moral cases in diverse contexts. After all, moral theology is not a deductive science such as mathematics or logic. This article tries to highlight this point (which has been either forgotten or ignored by quite a number of contemporary moral theologians) by using a few selected teachings of St. Alphonsus in his Theologia Moralis along with those of Pope Francis in Amoris laetitia, concluding that the latter is a re-echoing of the pastoral/moral spirit of the former. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Clio: Revista de Pesquisa Histórica (01024736) is the property of Universidad Federal de Pernambuco / Revista Clio and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Parts 1 and 2 in this series of three articles have shown that and how strong evidence‐based medicine has neither a coherent theoretical foundation nor creditable application to clinical practice. Because of its core commitment to the discredited positivist tradition it holds both a false concept of scientific knowledge and misunderstandings concerning clinical decision‐making. Strong EBM continues attempts to use flawed adjustments to recover from the unsalvageable base view. Paper three argues that a promising solution is at hand if we can manage several modes of inclusion. A modified original, moderate version of EBM continues though usually overshadowed. As definitively laid out by Sackett in the 1990s, clinical decision making is intended to be person‐centered, recognizing and integrating multiple modes of evidence and knowledge that have been marginalized: professional experience, illness narratives, and individual patients' values and preferences. Complementary resources are at hand: interpretative understanding and practice, such as philosophical anthropology, hermeneutical phenomenology, complexity theory, and phronetic practices respond to the major problems and open new possibilities. Phronesis is especially important in regard to public decision making. Within part 3 an additional tone necessarily occurs. While most of papers 1, 2, and 3 are written in the classical mode of contrasting the theoretical‐logical and empirical evidence offered by contending positions bearing on the decision making and judgement in clinical practice, a shift occurs when considerations move beyond what is possible for clinical practitioners to accomplish. A different, discontinuous level of power operates in the trans‐personal realm of instrumental policy, insurance, and hospital management practices. In this social‐economic‐political‐ethical realm what happens in clinical practice today increasingly becomes a matter of what is "done unto" clinical practitioners, of what hampers their professional action and thus care of individual patients and clients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fallberichte bieten einen wertvollen Einblick in die osteopathische Praxis. Sie ermöglichen die Beschreibung von Diagnosen, Interventionen und Managementstrategien bei Beschwerden, die in der Praxis auftreten. Häufig werden Fallberichte mit Beschreibungen von seltenen oder besonderen Fällen in Verbindung gebracht. Für Osteopath*innen sind jedoch auch Berichte über häufige Beschwerden außerordentlich nützlich. Dieser Artikel soll erläutern, wie man einen Fallbericht für diese und viele andere medizinische Zeitschriften verfasst. Die korrekte Anwendung der Richtlinien für Fallberichte (CARE) wird beschrieben, und Praxisbeispiele werden präsentiert. Die Autoren möchten Therapeut*innen dazu ermutigen, die Veröffentlichung von Fallberichten in Betracht zu ziehen, um die Evidenzbasis des Berufsstandes zu erweitern und Informationen für zukünftige Forschungsvorhaben zu liefern. Case reports provide a valuable insight into osteopathic practice. They allow for the description of diagnoses, interventions and management strategies for complaints that present to practice. Although case reports are traditionally associated with descriptions of rare or unique cases, reports of more common presentations to osteopaths are exceptionally useful. The purpose of this Masterclass is to describe how to construct a case report for the journal, and many other medical journals. The Masterclass outlines how to use the Case Report (CARE) guidelines and provides examples from published case reports related to osteopathic practice. We hope that this Masterclass will encourage practitioners to consider publishing case reports to expand the professions' evidence base and inform future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Der Urologe A is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Intensive care unit (ICU) professionals engage in ethical decision making under conditions of high stakes, great uncertainty, time-sensitivity and frequent irreversibility of action. Casuistry is a way by which actionable knowledge is obtained through comparing a patient case to previous cases from experience in clinical practice. However, within the field of study as well as in practice, evidence-based medicine is the dominant epistemic framework. This multiple case study evaluated the use of casuistic reasoning by intensive care unit (ICU) professionals during moral case deliberation. It took place in two Dutch hospitals between June 2020 and June 2022. Twentyfive moral case deliberations from ICU practice were recorded and analyzed using discourse analysis. Additionally, 47 interviews were held with ICU professionals who participated in these deliberations, analyzed using thematic analysis. We found that ICU professionals made considerable use of case comparisons when discussing continuation, withdrawal or limitation. Analogies played a role in justifying or complicating moral judgements, and also played a role in addressing moral distress. The language of case-based arguments is most often not overtly normative. Rather, the data shows that casuistic reasoning deals with the medical, ethical and contextual elements of decisions in an integrated manner. Facilitators of MCD have an essential role in (supporting ICU professionals in) scrutinizing casuistic arguments. The data shows that during MCD, actual reasoning often deviated from principle- and rule-based reasoning which ICU professionals preferred themselves. Evidence-based arguments often gained the character of analogical arguments, especially when a patient-at-hand was seen as highly unique from the average patients in the literature. Casuistic arguments disguised as evidence-based arguments may therefore provide ICU professionals with a false sense of certainty. Within education, we should strive to train clinicians and ethics facilitators so that they can recognize and evaluate casuistic arguments. • ICU professionals use paradigmatic cases to address ethical issues. • Paradigm cases include spinal cord injury patients and patients with cancer. • Casuistic reasoning is not always critically appraised by ICU professionals. • Case-analogies from the literature can provide a false sense of moral certainty. • Clinicians should be trained so that they can appraise casuistic arguments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The period of 16th to 18th centuries has brought about significant changes in legal thought. In addition to looking for a system in conflicting Roman law and Canon law texts, late scholastics formulated the first general rules (regulae) that they derived from the Roman case law and which were to become the nucleus of current, predominantly systematic, approach to law in Europe – applying the rule prescribed by law, court practice or legal science onto the facts of the case via the so-called legal syllogism method. And although in the mid- 20th century there were also attempts to reinvigorate the casuistic approach to law known previously in the ancient Rome and in medieval moral theology (revived through Viehweg’s topics or Perelman’s new rhetoric), these efforts have ultimately not changed the prevailing way of legal thinking. However, current technological challenges as well as strongly perceived ambiguity of law, especially in the so-called hard cases (the most difficult legal cases), where there is no clear legal solution to be found in legal norms, the approaches and methods of problem-based (casuistic, topical) legal thinking resurface again. There seems to be thus a need for a new (and indeed beneficial) reconsidering of legal casuistry, helping to address the so far unclear legal problems, arising more often than ever before. This sort of new legal casuistry can be thereby built on the foundations taken from Roman law as well as from ethics, more specifically from the early modern moral theology.

The COVID19 pandemic is generating an international effort to know the main dynamic aspects that this new epidemic crisis is causing, which is why a large number of initiatives are emerging around the world in relation to the development of mathematical models. The present work develops a dynamic simulation model based on the Systems Dynamics technique, under a systemic vision approach of the social and health problems it raises. The results have been simulated with respect to the casuistry of the Community of Madrid. The tremendous problem posed by the group of undetected infected, the cause of the spread of the epidemic, as well as the evidence of the technical difficulty posed by the lack of reliability of official data, for this reason, is evident. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]