ABSTRACT
Es frecuente que la docencia de la bioética se base en el aprendizaje de los principios de autonomía, be neficencia, no maleficencia y justicia, ampliamente usados hoy. De cara a la práctica ética, estos principios adolecen de una insuficiencia notable, dejando aparte su ambigüedad y otros problemas. Pero de cara a la docencia muestran una especial incongruencia, por varios motivos: a) poca adecuación de los términos a los conceptos que quieren expresarse, b) formalismo que dificulta el acercamiento a la realidad, c) poca adecuación a las necesidades del discente y d) ser términos especializados en un ámbito que debería ser fundamentalmente divulgativo. Se examinan en detalle estas cuatro limitaciones, que aconsejan otro en foque en la docencia de la bioética; se aporta una reflexión final sobre la diferencia entre los principios de la bioética y la ética (AU)
It is common base the teaching of bioethics on the learning of the principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice, widely used today. In terms of ethical practice, these principles suffer from a notable inadequacy, leaving aside their ambiguity and other problems. Nevertheless, as a teaching meth od, they show a special incongruity, for several reasons: a) little adequacy of the terms to the concepts that want to be expressed, b) formalism that hinders the approach to reality, c) little adaptation to the needs of the student and d) be specialized terms in a field that should be fundamentally informative. These four limitations, which advise another approach in the teaching of bioethics, are examined in detail; a final reflection is provided on the difference between the principles of bioethics and ethics (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Ethics, Medical/education , Education, Medical , Bioethics/educationABSTRACT
It is common base the teaching of bioethics on the learning of the principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice, widely used today. In terms of ethical practice, these principles suffer from a notable inadequacy, leaving aside their ambiguity and other problems. Nevertheless, as a teaching method, they show a special incongruity, for several reasons: a) little adequacy of the terms to the concepts that want to be expressed, b) formalism that hinders the approach to reality, c) little adaptation to the needs of the student and d) be specialized terms in a field that should be fundamentally informative. These four limitations, which advise another approach in the teaching of bioethics, are examined in detail; a final reflection is provided on the difference between the principles of bioethics and ethics.
Subject(s)
Bioethics , Personal Autonomy , Humans , Beneficence , Ethics, Medical , Social JusticeABSTRACT
El consentimiento informado en investigación se inscribe en la relación médico-paciente, que ha sufrido, y sigue sufriendo, importantes cambios: desde el planteamiento clásico, como relación de amistad, al planteamiento contemporáneo, como relación entre extraños (enemigos potenciales, siguiendo tesis ilustradas sobre la sociedad), que es regulada por normas éticas y legales. El principal objetivo de estas últimas es conseguir, mediante requisitos formales, que dicha relación no perjudique al paciente. Bajo esta luz, se examina y compara el consentimiento informado en las principales normativas internacionales y en la ley española. Especialmente, nos centramos en la hoja de información al paciente, la comprensión, la voluntariedad, la certificación y la comunicación de los resultados de la investigación. Se concluye con la observación de la seria limitación intrínseca de la que adolecen estas normativas, que impiden, más que favorecen, el trato adecuado al paciente.
Informed consent for research is part of the doctor-patient relationship, which has suffered and continues to suffer important changes. These range from the classic approach, such as friendship, to the contemporary approach, namely, a relationship between strangers (potential enemies, according to illustrated notions of society) regulated by ethical and legal standards. The primary objective of these standards is to ensure, through formal requirements, that the relationship does not harm the patient. With this perspective in mind, the study examines and compares informed consent in light of the most important international standards and under Spanish law. There is a particular focus on the patient information sheet, understanding, willingness, certification and communication of research results. The study concludes there are serious inherent constraints in these regulations that prevent rather than promote treating the patient properly.
O consentimento informado em pesquisa está apoiado na relação médico-paciente, que sofreu, e continua sofrendo, importantes mudanças: da proposta clássica, como relação de amizade, à proposta contemporânea, como relação entre estranhos (inimigos potenciais, seguindo teses ilustradas sobre a sociedade), que é regulada por normas éticas e legais. O principal objetivo destas últimas é conseguir, mediante requisitos formais, que essa relação não prejudique o paciente. Sob esse prisma, examina e compara-se o consentimento informado nas principais normativas internacionais e na lei espanhola. Especialmente, centra-se no prontuário do paciente, na compreensão, na voluntariedade, na certificação e na comunicação dos resultados da pesquisa. Conclui-se com a observação da séria limitação intrínseca da qual sofrem essas normativas, que impedem, mais do que favorecem, o tratamento adequado do paciente.
Subject(s)
Humans , Patients , Bioethics , Informed Consent , Medical IllustrationABSTRACT
The principles of the bioethics, coined in United States at the end of the seventies and diffused in our social environment one decade later, enclose inside a semantic ambiguity that here it is analyzed in their master lines; this ambiguity oscillates between a relativistic meaning and another agreed with the classic concept of Nature; this ambiguity has been transmitted to who, being part of the field of the Hippocratic medical ethics, have adopted its terminology, and these are the immense majority of the medical class. This phenomenon is easily leading towards the abandonment of the medical ethics based on the natural law (the Hippocratic-Christian tradition), to make it finish in a more or less clear relativism. to avoid this problem, some solutions in the field of the medical ethical terminology are proposed.
