ABSTRACT
Recognizing the role of technology in the development of medicine and the impact of telecommunication advances, we reflect on the meaning and ethics of the use of Telemedicine, both in its general dimension for the use and distribution of knowledge, as well as in the delivery of health actions, scientific research, and data management. Teleconsultation is discussed in greater detail, analyzing its process and application, reviewing its possible advantages and disadvantages, from the point of view of providers and patients. We highlight the need to carry out an appropriate evaluation of each instance, from the point of view of both the patient and the professional who uses it. The importance of maintaining a doctor-patient relationship in agreement with the nature and practice of Medicine, respecting people's dignity, is emphasized. We mention the ethical conditions that must be bore in mind for the proper use of telemedicine. We discuss the eventual influence that this practice will have on the concept and practice of medical care, while suggesting the need to legislate on the matter.
Subject(s)
Humans , Physician-Patient Relations , Telemedicine , MoralsABSTRACT
Conscientious Objection arises as a response to a regulation that is judged as immoral. Faced with a law that is considered unfair, the citizen can respond accepting it against his will, exercising conscientious objection on a personal level or, collectively reaching civil disobedience or revolutionary violence. This is an old discussion known since ancient Greece. The current enactment of laws that allow actions previously judged as crime, and that contravene medical tradition, reactivated the discussion about such objection. Some people, such as Savolescu, who denies the legitimacy of conscientious objection invoked by doctors, arguing that it is inefficient, leads to inequality and is inconsistent. He proposes that the values of these professionals can be tolerated privately but should not be determinant in the public sphere. These arguments are critically examined, mentioning pertinent answers from theoretical and practical points of view. We highlight that ethics should not differ in public and private spheres and the principles should be the same, but exercised in different fields. It is concluded that conscientious objection is acquiring legitimacy and that it is necessary to reflect on the underlying reasons that lead to invoke it. It should be considered a civilized resource against determinations of power that are considered to be an attempt against personal values and moral integrity.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Physicians , Conscience , Refusal to Treat , Dissent and DisputesABSTRACT
During the last years, bioethical discussion has highlighted the role of the patients' autonomy, being informed consent its particular expression, about decisions that they should make about their own health. The Hippocratic tradition, the deontological positions of the Geneva Declaration of the World Medical Association and numerous codes of ethics in various countries, require that the physician, above all, should ensure patients' health. In this context the discussion on pros and cons for the so-called "therapeutic privilege" are discussed. The "therapeutic privilege" refers to the withholding of information by the clinician during the consent process in the belief that disclosure of this information would lead to harm or suffering of the patient. The circumstances and conditions in which this privilege can become valid are discussed. Special reference is made in order to respect multiculturalism and to the possibility of obtaining advice from health care ethics committees. The role of prudence in the doctor-patient relation must be highlighted. Disclosure of information should be subordinated and oriented to the integral well-being of the patient.