Back to Search Start Over

Between professional values, social regulations and patient preferences: medical doctors' perceptions of ethical dilemmas

Authors :
Karin Isaksson Rø
Morten Magelssen
Olaf Aasland
Reidun Førde
Berit Bringedal
Source :
Journal of Medical Ethics. :medethics-2017
Publication Year :
2017
Publisher :
BMJ, 2017.

Abstract

Background We present and discuss the results of a Norwegian survey of medical doctors9 views on potential ethical dilemmas in professional practice. Methods The study was conducted in 2015 as a postal questionnaire to a representative sample of 1612 doctors, among which 1261 responded (78%). We provided a list of 41 potential ethical dilemmas and asked whether each was considered a dilemma, and whether the doctor would perform the task, if in a position to do so. Conceptually, dilemmas arise because of tensions between two or more of four doctor roles: the patient’s advocate, a steward of societal interests, a member of a profession and a private individual. Results 27 of the potential dilemmas were considered dilemmas by at least 50% of the respondents. For more than half of the dilemmas, the anticipated course of action varied substantially within the professional group, with at least 20% choosing a different course than their colleagues, indicating low consensus in the profession. Conclusions Doctors experience a large range of ethical dilemmas, of which many have been given little attention by academic medical ethics. The less-discussed dilemmas are characterised by a low degree of consensus in the profession about how to handle them. There is a need for medical ethicists, medical education, postgraduate courses and clinical ethics support to address common dilemmas in clinical practice. Viewing dilemmas as role conflicts can be a fruitful approach to these discussions.

Details

ISSN :
14734257 and 03066800
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Journal of Medical Ethics
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....dfecb79a908f33f913455cec7d4ba58a
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2017-104408