Accommodating religion and belief in healthcare: Political threats, agonistic democracy and established religion.

This paper considers what concept of accommodation is necessary to identify and address discrimination, disadvantages and disparities in such a way that the plurality of religious people with their beliefs, values and practices may be justly accommodated in healthcare. It evaluates threats to the possibility of such accommodation pertaining by considering what beliefs and practices might increase the risk of unjust discrimination against and disadvantage for religious people, whether as individuals or as groups; and the risk of disparities between the care provided to religious people. The claim is that there is an important cluster of risks that are political in kind and emergent within philosophical bioethics. While not amounting (yet) to a trend, they are sufficiently threatening to a just civic life for patients and healthcare staff as to warrant scrutiny. After an Introductory Section 1, Section 2 evaluates a criticism of 'accommodation' and the apparently additional health-related requirements that those of religious faith demand, when compared with other people. It does so by comparing Lori Beaman's idea of agonism with that of a distinct and somewhat complementary approach in Jonathan Chaplin's political philosophy, before examining the role of established religion in setting the conditions for the accommodation of religion and belief in healthcare. Section 3 examines risks to such accommodation by engaging critically with three health-related instantiations of political philosophy that differ radically from both Beaman and Chaplin. A concluding Section 4 focusses on appropriate modes of communicating about religious and other beliefs in healthcare.

'A Knife into My Heart': Cries, Compassion and Ethical Life.

The subtitle to the conference upon which this journal issue is based invited us to 'follow Crowter'. This paper does so primarily by following the person and only thereby attends to the legal judgment. In particular, it will attend to her comment that When mum told me about the discrimination against babies like me in the womb, I felt like a knife had been put into my heart. It made me feel less valued than other people. The argument is that (I) there are strong reasons for such an approach from the field of theological ethics and that this is valuable for pastoral theology and for bioethics. With this case made, the argument proceeds (II) by following and building on three elements of Heidi Crowter's words concerning (a) the knife (b) the heart and (c) the person. The argument concludes (III) with theological reflection and deliberation regarding institutions, practices and actions which will make for 'ethical society', principally focussed on ecclesial life.

The haunted heart and the Holy Ghost: on retrieval, donation and death.

This enquiry examines problems which haunt the 'heart' and its donation. It begins by examining the heart's enduring significance for culturally mediated self-understanding, its vulnerability to misunderstanding and abuse and its relevance to challenging the determination of death by neurological criteria. Despite turns to brain-centred self-conceptions, the heart remains haunted by the hybrid experiences of identity accompanying organ transplant, the relational significance attached to dead hearts witnessed in the Alder Hey scandal and claims that heart transplants commonly constitute the legitimate killing of a person. To explore these phenomena, traditions are retrieved in which the heart-as-organ was construed in terms of a person's core identity. Influential Abrahamic beliefs about 'the heart' are considered in order to explore explanations for why the heart remains culturally pre-eminent, to make intelligible our haunted hearts and to examine possible violations of solidarity in organ donation practice. Jewish and Christian Scriptures are exegeted to illumine the sources of our haunting and address the desire for holistic bodily life. In these sources, the heart is the seat of affections, intelligence and agency but requires healing, conceived via the surgical metaphors of heart transplant and circumcision, if people are to join the insightful, solidary path of pilgrimage. Absent healing, the heart experiences a judgement of the whole person-organ-and-core-at the moment of death. Through such exegesis, the doctrine of the Holy Ghost emerges as a way to make intelligible, though not dispel, the heart's haunting. The doctrine's practical significance concerns the possibility of social unity among hearts, 'intercordiality', which construes people within a covenantal life of pilgrimage which encourages heart donation in certain circumstances, makes intelligible the Alder Hey parents' experience of social misunderstanding and rejects ascribing any legitimacy in medical culture to the consensual killing of patients for the sake of retrieving their organs.

'Your country needs you': the ethics of allocating staff to high-risk clinical roles in the management of patients with COVID-19.

As the COVID-19 pandemic impacts on health service delivery, health providers are modifying care pathways and staffing models in ways that require health professionals to be reallocated to work in critical care settings. Many of the roles that staff are being allocated to in the intensive care unit and emergency department pose additional risks to themselves, and new policies for staff reallocation are causing distress and uncertainty to the professionals concerned. In this paper, we analyse a range of ethical issues associated with changes to staff allocation processes in the face of COVID-19. In line with a dominant view in the medical ethics literature, we claim, first, that no individual health professional has a specific, positive obligation to treat a patient when doing so places that professional at risk of harm, and so there is a clear ethical tension in any reallocation process in this context. Next, we argue that the changing asymmetries of health needs in hospitals means that careful consideration needs to be given to a stepwise process for deallocating staff from their usual duties. We conclude by considering how a justifiable process of reallocating professionals to high-risk clinical roles should be configured once those who are 'fit for reallocation' have been identified. We claim that this process needs to attend to three questions that we consider in detail: (1) how the choice to make reallocation decisions is made, (2) what justifiable models for reallocation might look like and (3) what is owed to those who are reallocated.

The Dignity of the Frail: On Compassion, Terror, and Social Death.

This enquiry considers how the dignity of the frail elderly is objectively grounded, socially constructed, and subjectively experienced. The lives of the frail trouble public consciousness. A terror of old age, felt by young or old, is liable to form a toxic affective culture of social death. Against such threats, the dignity of the frail requires defense. However, empathy- and capacities-based approaches to dignity fail to give a compelling account of humanity's membership in shared community. By contrast, the poetry of the Psalms and New Testament puts terror to flight by articulating how dignity is found within God's steadfast, worth-bestowing love which tenderly accompanies humanity in its shared dustiness from the womb to old age and beyond. The blessed dignity these sources describe is found to be more conceptually robust and affectively compelling than an individualistic eudaimonism. Cultivating an ecology of dignity in practice is finally shown to depend on a compassion which grows from the same fertile, imaginative ground.

Mind the gap? The platform trial as a working environment.

BACKGROUND: Trials have become bigger and more complicated due to the complexity introduced by biomarker stratification, and the advent of multi-arm multi-stage trials, and umbrella and basket platform designs. The trials unit at University College London has been at the forefront of this work, with ground-breaking trials such as STAMPEDE and FOCUS4. The trial management and data management teams on these trials have summarised the operational challenges, to enable the broader clinical trials community to learn from their experiences. In a small-scale qualitative study, we examined the personal experience of individual researchers working on these trials. COMMENTARY: We found reports of high workloads, with potentially significant stress for individuals and with an impact on their career choices. We conclude that there was an initial underestimation of the work required and of the inherent, largely unanticipated, challenges. We discuss the importance of fully understanding these trials' resource requirements, both for those writing grant applications and critically, for those with responsibility for deciding on funding. The working environment was characterised by three features: complexity, scale and heightened expectations. These features are highly attractive for professional development and engender high levels of loyalty and commitment. We observed a trade-off between these intrinsic rewards and the continuous demands of overlapping tasks, balancing a mix of routine and high-profile work, and the changing nature of pivotal roles. Such demands present challenges for colleague relationships, by enhancing the potential for competition and by disrupting the natural opportunities to pause, review and celebrate team achievements. In addition, molecular stratification in effect brings the patient into the trial office, as a specific individual, despite anonymisation, who is owed test results and a treatment decision. We discuss these observations with a view to interconnecting the need for compassion for patients with caring for the researchers engaged in the research ecosystem who are aiming to produce much hoped-for advances in medical science. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for increased awareness of the challenge these studies place on those throughout the team delivering the study. Such considerations must influence leaders and funders, both in their initial budget considerations and throughout delivery.

Personalised Medicine: The Promise, the Hype and the Pitfalls.

In engaging critically with personalised medicine and mapping pitfalls which mark its progress this project aims to stimulate conversations which deal intelligently with controversies for the sake of consensus. We aim to ask the ethical questions which will lead to the improvement of healthcare and we take an open-minded approach to finding answers to them over time. What is or should be meant by 'personalised medicine' is a major theme of this issue. It is a debate bound up with question of both values in the sense of ethical reflection and value in the sense of economic return. This editorial discusses and interrelates the articles of the issue under four headings: the promise and the hype of personalised medicine; the human person and the communication of risk; data sharing and participation; value, equity and power. A key intention throughout is to provoke discourse and debate, to identify aspirations which are more grounded in myth or hype than reality and to challenge them; and to identify focussed, practical questions which need further examination.

Self-Knowledge and Risk in Stratified Medicine.

This article considers why and how self-knowledge is important to communication about risk and behaviour change by arguing for four claims. First, it is doubtful that genetic knowledge should properly be called 'self-knowledge' when its ordinary effects on self-motivation and behaviour change seem so slight. Second, temptations towards a reductionist, fatalist, construal of persons' futures through a 'molecular optic' should be resisted. Third, any plausible effort to change people's behaviour must engage with cultural self-knowledge, values and beliefs, catalysed by the communication of genetic risk. For example, while a Judaeo-Christian notion of self-knowledge is distinctively theological, people's self-knowledge is plural in its insight and sources. Fourth, self-knowledge is found in compassionate, if tense, communion which yields freedom from determinism even amidst suffering. Stratified medicine thus offers a newly precise kind of humanising health care through societal solidarity with the riskiest. However, stratification may also mean that molecularly unstratified, 'B' patients' experience involves accentuated suffering and disappointment, a concern requiring further research.

Religion and culture.

Religion, belief and culture should be recognized as potential sources of moral purpose and personal strength in healthcare, enhancing the welfare of both clinicians and patients amidst the experience of ill-health, healing, suffering and dying. Communication between doctors and patients and between healthcare staff should attend sensitively to the welfare benefits of religion, belief and culture. Doctors should respect personal religious and cultural commitments, taking account of their significance for treatment and care preferences. Good doctors understand their own beliefs and those of others. They hold that patient welfare is best served by understanding the importance of religion, belief and culture to patients and colleagues. The sensitive navigation of differences between people's religions, beliefs and cultures is part of doctors' civic obligations and in the UK should follow the guidance of the General Medical Council and Department of Health. In particular, apparent conflict between clinical judgement or normal practices and a patient's culture, religion and belief should be considered carefully. Doctors' own religion or culture may play an important role in promoting adherence to this good practice. In all matters, doctors' conduct should be governed by the law and arrangements for conscientious objection that are in effect.