 | | Medical ethics: Ethical Guidelines to Social Media | Medical ethics: Ethical Guidelines to Social Media
Medical ethics: Ethical Guidelines to Social Media
Ethical Guidelines Social Media Overview
This guideline was developed to help health practitioners understand their obligations when using Social Media. The guideline applies to all health practitioners registered with the Health Professions Council of South Africa Social Media describes the online tools and electronic platforms that people use to share content such as opinions, information, photos, videos, and audio. The use of Social Media is expanding rapidly as individuals and organisations are embracing user-generated content through social networks, internet forums and personal blogs. Health professionals need to be aware that there are potential risks involved in the sharing of information via Social Media, even if the consequences are unintended. A key objective of the HPCSA and its Professional Boards is to guide the profession and protect the public. Some health practitioners may find Social Media beneficial as it allows them to keep updated on the latest healthcare developments through reputable user generated content. Acknowledgement Journal: Ethical and Professional Rules of the Health Professions Council of South Africa
| 3 | | R 425.00 |  |
| | Medical Ethics: Ethical Guidelines for the Withholding and Withdrawing of Treatment | Medical Ethics: Ethical Guidelines for the Withholding and Withdrawing of Treatment
Medical Ethics: Ethical Guidelines for the Withholding and Withdrawing of Treatment
Overview
Health care practitioners have a responsibility to make the care of their patients their first concern. The guidance in these guidelines is intended to provide an ethical framework of good practice for health care practitioners in circumstances where they are faced with making a decision on whether to withhold or withdraw life-prolonging treatment. It takes account of existing law in this area, that allowing for withholding and withdrawing of life sustaining treatments and that which prohibits killing, active euthanasia, and assisted suicide.
The health care professional may alleviate the suffering of a terminally ill patient by withholding treatment i.e. allowing the natural process of death to follow its course, provided there is consultation with another health care practitioner who is an expert in the field, and where available, discussions with the closest relatives. The HPCSA also expects health care practitioners to observe the provisions of the World Medical Association Declaration on Terminal Illness. Acknowledgement Journal: Ethical and Professional Rules of the Health Professions Council of South Africa
| 3 | | R 485.00 | |
| | Medical Ethics: Artificial Intelligence Ethics – Too Principled to Fail? | Medical Ethics: Artificial Intelligence Ethics – Too Principled to Fail?
Medical Ethics: Artificial Intelligence Ethics – Too Principled to Fail?
Overview
AI Ethics is now a global topic of discussion in academic and policy circles. At least 63 public-private initiatives have produced statements describing high-level principles, values, and other tenets to guide the ethical development, deployment, and governance of AI. According to recent meta-analyses, AI Ethics has seemingly converged on a set of principles that closely resemble the four classic principles of medical ethics. Despite the initial credibility granted to a principled approach to AI Ethics by the connection to principles in medical ethics, there are reasons to be concerned about its future impact on AI development and governance. Significant differences exist between medicine and AI development that suggest a principled approach in the latter may not enjoy success comparable to the former. Compared to medicine, AI development lacks (1) common aims and fiduciary duties, (2) professional history and norms, (3) proven methods to translate principles into practice, and (4) robust legal and professional accountability mechanisms. These differences suggest we should not yet celebrate consensus around high-level principles that hide deep political and normative disagreement.
Acknowledgment Author
Brent Mittelstadti Journal
Nature Machine Intelligence November 2019
| 3 | | R 420.00 | |
| | Medical Ethics: What is the place for philosophy within the field of medicine? A review of contemporary issues in medical ethics | Medical Ethics: What is the place for philosophy within the field of medicine? A review of contemporary issues in medical ethics
Medical Ethics: What is the place for philosophy within the field of medicine? A review of contemporary issues in medical ethics
Overview This extended essay seeks to unpack some of the key aspects of philosophy which are applicable to medical thought and practice. It proceeds via an analytical discussion of the contemporary debate in three key areas of medical ethics: euthanasia, concepts of health and disease and psychiatry. The main claims are as follows:
1. The case for legalising euthanasia is strong on philosophical grounds but there are numerous practical obstacles. 2. Elements from the normative and naturalistic definitions of disease are necessary for a thorough definition that dodges common objections to either. 3. Mental health cannot be subsumed under a purely physicalist model of health rendering it distinctly different from other fields in Medicine.
Through a detailed discussion of three salient issues in the philosophy of medicine, it is argued that the application of profound philosophical thought to medicine and its practices reveals a depth that necessitates exploration before simply following the aims of curing all. Philosophical rigour matched with modern medicine has the potential to engage patients and help them make independent, informed decisions and assist physicians to think more clearly, analytically and empathetically.
Acknowledgement
Author Richard Fenton Journal Philosophy, Ethics and Humanities in Medicine
| 3 | | R 465.00 | |
| | Medical Ethics: Ethics of the Placebo in Clinical Practice. | Medical Ethics: Ethics of the Placebo in Clinical Practice.
Medical Ethics: Ethics of the Placebo in Clinical Practice.
OVERVIEW
The placebo is not easy to define. As a matter of fact, some scholars are despaired of the possibility of ever finding an adequate definition for the term. However, many current definitions invoke the non-specific nature of the treatment effects as the leading feature of the placebo.
The object of this article was however to address the question of the placebo in clinical practice. This article nonetheless argued that the placebo could be an effective treatment. The article further argued that the use of the placebo does not entail deception. This article equally highlighted guidelines under which the placebo may be used for clinical purposes. This article further suggested that in selected cases, the use of the placebo may also be morally imperative. It is imperative to state that the arguments in this article were presented by three case vignettes.
The article was concluded that the placebo can be beneficial to physicians of many clinical situations
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
AUTHORS: Lichtenberg U Heresco-Levy, U Nitzan
JOURNAL: BMJ Journal of Medical Ethics
PUBLISHER: BMJ Open
URL: http://www.group.bmj.com
| 3 | | R 425.00 | |