Search results

Cybersecurity in healthcare has become an urgent matter in recent years due to various malicious attacks on hospitals and other parts of the healthcare infrastructure. The purpose of this paper is to provide an outline of how core values of the health systems, such as the principles of biomedical ethics, are in a supportive or conflicting relation to cybersecurity.

This paper claims that it is possible to map the desiderata relevant to cybersecurity onto the four principles of medical ethics, i.e. beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy and justice, and explore value conflicts in that way.

With respect to the question of how these principles should be balanced, there are reasons to think that the priority of autonomy relative to beneficence and non-maleficence in contemporary medical ethics could be extended to value conflicts in health-related cybersecurity.

However, the tension between autonomy and justice, which relates to the desideratum of usability of information and communication technology systems, cannot be ignored even if one assumes that respect for autonomy should take priority over other moral concerns.

In terms of value conflicts, most discussions in healthcare deal with the conflict of balancing efficiency and privacy given the sensible nature of health information. In this paper, the authors provide a broader and more detailed outline.

Public and profession alike are troubled by what they perceive as a loss of professional status in medicine. Can it or ought it be retrieved? How? These questions cannot be answered without understanding what a profession is, what professing medicine entails in the way of character traits, and whether, and how, these traits can be taught. Answers are sought in the phenomena of the physician–patient encounter, the theory of virtue ethics and its implication for character formation. In addition, the moral attitudes and practices must also be supportive of the idea of a profession. Courses in professionalism might help but the problem is first of all a moral one.

A species of moral malaise afflicts the professions today, a malaise that may prove fatal to their moral identities and perilous to our whole society. It is manifest in a growing conviction even among conscientious doctors, lawyers, and ministers that it is no longer possible to practice their professions within traditional ethical constraints. More specifically, the belief is taking hold that unless professionals look out for their own self‐interest, they will be crushed by commercialization, competition, government regulation, malpractice actions, advertising, public and media hostility, and a host of other inimical socio‐economic forces. This line of reasoning leads the professional to infer that self‐interest justifies compromises in, and even rejection of, obligations that standards of professional ethics have traditionally imposed.

Information ethics, as is well known, has emerged as an independent area of ethical and philosophical inquiry. There are a number of academic journals that are devoted entirely to the numerous ethical issues that arise in connection with the new information communication technologies; these issues include a host of intellectual property, information privacy, and security issues of concern to librarians and other information professionals. In addition, there are a number of major international conferences devoted to information ethics every year. It would hardly be overstating the matter to say that information ethics is as “hot” an area of theoretical inquiry as medical ethics. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview on these and related issues.

The paper presents a review of relevant information ethics literature together with the author's assessment of the arguments.

There are issues that are more abstract and basic than the substantive issues with which most information ethics theorizing is concerned. These issues are thought to be “foundational” in the sense that we cannot fully succeed in giving an analysis of the concrete problems of information ethics (e.g. are legal intellectual property rights justifiably protected?) until these issues are adequately addressed.

The paper offers a needed survey of foundational issues in information ethics.

This study aims to investigate the perceived role of the Islamic medical care practice of Muslim doctors in Malaysian Muslim-friendly private hospitals.

Data were collection through self-administered questionnaires voluntarily submitted by the respondents. The survey covered selected major Muslim-friendly private hospitals in the country in the states of Kedah, Johor, Penang, Selangor, Kelantan and Kuala Lumpur. The non-probability purposive sampling was used, as the respondents and locations of the survey areas were predetermined.

Five dimensions of the Muslim-friendly medical care practice were identified, namely, medical etiquettes, physical examination, proper cleansing process of blood and body fluids, proper handling and treatment of infectious diseases and doctors’ advice to Muslim patients. The findings also indicate that the scale development analysis produced excellent results which can be used for reproducible or repetitive medical care purposes and for integration facts and figures for inclusion into wider medical care policy and practices.

The results from the study can further develop Islamic medical care practices and enable medical service providers to upgrade their performances to an enviable strategic status.

Islamic medical care is a new mode of healthcare service market, as there are very few studies on this topic from the perspective of Muslim patients or no obvious facts are known. This study has first explored Muslim doctors’ perceived role in Islamic medical care practice in Malaysian Muslim-friendly private hospitals. This empirical study can immensely contribute to the further development of Islamic medical care practice for Muslim doctors in particular and for the Muslim-friendly hospital service marketing strategy in general.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (HM Government, 2005) introduced safeguards to protect people who lack capacity from intrusive research. While these safeguards stemmed from predominantly medical ethical review concerns and developments aimed to protect people from physical and psychological damage and harm, the Act relates to all forms of research. The implications of the requirements of the Act for the conduct of social care research and the identification of helpful approaches or development of new knowledge concerning people who may lack capacity are, as yet, unknown. There are some concerns that the Act does not fully account for social research, does not recognise its importance to and differences from health‐related research, and may even hamper such research from taking place. This paper describes the findings and implications from a research project funded by the Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) and the Department of Health that considered the impact of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 on the ethical scrutiny and development of social care research. The particular focus of the study was processes relating to university research ethics committees (URECs). The study was undertaken in two stages, beginning with an online survey of UREC policies and procedures and was followed by interviews with social care researchers working in areas in which people may lack capacity according to the terms of the Act. Recommendations for research ethics review are made that will be of importance to practitioners, policy‐makers and researchers.

Through an analysis of the HIV-Tainted-Blood Affair in Japan, this paper explores why pharmaceutical companies act in a socially irresponsible manner. The paper suggests encouraging members of these corporations to become more conscious of their responsibility to society by developing themselves as professionals. The analysis shows that drug disasters are not caused only by a particular “special villain,” but by the structural conflict between medical professional ethics and the profit making motivation of pharmaceutical companies. In other words, the behaviors of pharmaceutical companies fall into the interstices of professional ethics.

This paper examines beliefs and attitudes in the context of how they influence the decisions of university Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) as a preface to undertaking an empirical study in this area. It also aims at establishing a conceptual framework to guide the design of a questionnaire targeting beliefs about research ethics and the implications of these beliefs on review practices of HREC members throughout Australia.

Using content analysis of the extant body of the literature the paper examines the relationship between the concepts of beliefs and knowledge, beliefs and attitudes, and among beliefs, attitudes and behaviour in the context of research ethics.

The discussion suggests that ethics approval practices can, at times, be influenced more by personal beliefs than by contemporary review standards. It is also suggested that personal beliefs can be transmitted through the review process and that HRECs can serve to influence the transfer of values from reviewers to researchers.

The framework that this paper presents has the potential to appraise an array of perspectives which in turn would guide the design of professional development programs. In addition, an improved, more nuanced understanding of how HREC members make ethical decisions will positively impact and inform best practice in the review of ethical applications for research projects.

The paper presents a novel theoretical framework underpinning research ethics reviewer beliefs and attitudes within a contemporary context.

The United States’ population is rapidly aging. As older people require more expensive medical and nursing attention, health-care/nursing costs keep rising, to the extent that they are not sustainable. As a result, the USA is faced with an ethical dilemma. While egalitarian ethical principles and the provisions of the American Nurses Association (ANA) code of ethics require the provision of medical/nursing care to everyone regardless of age, severity of disease and productivity, utilitarians view that as impossible. Assuming that provisions ANA’s codes of ethics are the same as ethical principles, this paper aims to discuss the debate between those two sides in detail.

The paper, viewing the rise of health-care/nursing costs as the cause of the above ethical dilemma, discusses Daniel Callahan’s utilitarian argument that, given the ever-rising health/nursing costs as a percentage of GDP, the USA will be forced to ration health care/nursing on the basis of age. The ethical arguments opposing Callahan’s arguments will also be presented.

While the debate between those two viewpoints is bond to continue, some writers have tried to find a compromise, a solution by assuming that, through efficiency, health/nursing costs can be lowered, making Callahan’s age-based rationing unnecessary.

This paper is original as it, by including nursing costs as an inseparable component of health-care costs, makes the aforementioned debate applicable to nursing care.

No topic in medical education has received more attention and generated more discussion in recent years than that of “professionalism”. In many ways, this should come as no surprise in light of the dramatic technical and scientific advances in medicine, the changing, and often confounding, roles of physicians in complex health care systems, and the growing expectation throughout society that physicians should provide more effective, patient-centered care. Any of these factors alone is sufficient to create anxiety and confusion about basic duties and responsibilities of physicians to patients, the medical profession and to society. In this complex, demanding, commercialized and yet, values-laden, world of health care it is an understatement to say that there are fundamental challenges to what it means to be a medical professional in today's society.