Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics ; 14(2):114-143, 2021.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1412377

ABSTRACT

During the COVID-19 pandemic, several hospitals implemented "birthing alone" policies, banning companions (e.g., partners, family members, doulas) from accompanying individuals giving birth. We offer an ethical analysis of these policies. First, we examine them through a consequentialist framework of risks and benefits. Second, we consider the significance of birth, highlighting the unique ways in which risks, relationships, and rights are understood in the context of obstetrics. We conclude that birthing alone policies are largely unjustified, as the harm they are certain to cause outweighs their possible benefits and because they fail to take into account what matters to mothers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics is the property of University of Toronto Press 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.)

2.
Hastings Cent Rep ; 51(6): 23-26, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1404557

ABSTRACT

Well before the Covid-19 pandemic, proponents of digital psychiatry were touting the promise of various digital tools and techniques to revolutionize mental health care. As social distancing and its knock-on effects have strained existing mental health infrastructures, calls have grown louder for implementing various digital mental health solutions at scale. Decisions made today will shape the future of mental health care for the foreseeable future. Here, in hopes of countering this hype, we examine four ethical and epistemic gaps surrounding the growth of digital mental health: the evidence gap, the inequality gap, the prediction-intervention gap, and the safety gap. We argue that these gaps ought to be considered by policy-makers before society commits to a digital psychiatric future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychiatry , Humans , Mental Health , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Am J Bioeth ; 21(2): 58-60, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1078757

Subject(s)
Bioethics , COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL