ABSTRACT
Globally, life expectancy is increasing, as is the need for effective care responses to chronic health conditions, global emergencies and health disparities. Alongside this is a shortage of skilled caregivers. This four-country qualitative study investigates the views of ‘care’ and ‘care careers’ of Generation Z (the next generation to join the workforce). Four cross-cultural themes emerged: conceptualising care;objects and subjects of care;recognising the challenges of care;and appreciating care work. Discussed in relation to Tronto’s analysis of care, these themes illuminate Generation Z’s commitment to care and highlight the need for organisational and political action to attract young people to care careers.
Subject(s)
Bioethical Issues , COVID-19 , Healthcare Disparities , Pandemics , Clinical Reasoning , Humans , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Discrimination , Vulnerable PopulationsABSTRACT
I am a nurse working in a respiratory ward, and a PhD student. I have a long-standing interest in ethics and was keen to discuss how to prepare for the ethical challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. In April, I posed some questions to Ann Gallagher, professor of ethics and care at the University of Surrey.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/nursing , Mass Media , Nurse's Role , Humans , Italy , United Kingdom , United StatesSubject(s)
International Council of Nurses , Research Report , Female , Global Health/ethics , Humans , Leadership , MaleABSTRACT
This paper is a response to a recent BMJ Blog: ?The duty to treat: where do the limits lie?? Members of the Surrey Heartlands Integrated Care Service Clinical Ethics Group (CEG) reflected on arguments in the Blog in relation to resuscitation during the COVID-19 pandemic.Clinicians have had to contend with ever-changing and conflicting guidance from the Resuscitation Council UK and Public Health England regarding personal protective equipment (PPE) requirements in resuscitation situations. St John Ambulance had different guidance for first responders.The situation regarding resuscitation led the CEG to consider ethical aspects of health care professionals? responses to the need for resuscitation during COVID-19. Members agreed that professionals should, ideally, have the level of PPE required for an aerosol generating procedure. However, there was no consensus regarding professionals? duty to care when this is not available. On the one hand, it was agreed that the casualty/patient?s interests regarding resuscitation should be prioritised due to professionals? contract with the public and professional privilege. On the other hand, risk thresholds were considered relevant to individual decision-making and professionals? duty to care. All agreed that decision-making should not be influenced by rewards or reprimands. It was agreed also that decisions to resuscitate should not be considered as moral heroism or supererogatory - regardless of PPE availability - but rather as ?minimally decent?. We agreed that it may be acceptable for professionals, with good reasons, to opt out of resuscitation attempts and these should be reflected on and discussed before the event.