8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Miseren des Krankenhauses, institutionelle Pathologien und klinische Organisationsethik Translated title: Miserable conditions in hospitals, institutional pathologies and clinical organizational ethics

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Personal und Patienten in Einrichtungen organisierter Krankenbehandlung erfahren und bekunden vielfältige miserable Zustände dieser Organisationen. Einige „Miseren“ lassen sich im Rahmen einer Theorie institutioneller Pathologien als störende Auswirkungen der Aktivitäten und Strukturen von Organisationen des Politiksystems (Gesundheitspolitik) und des Wirtschaftssystems (Gesundheitswirtschaft) erklären. Deshalb können Klinische Ethik-Komitees (KEKs) solchen Miseren nicht wirksam begegnen oder sie sogar nicht einmal thematisieren. Organisationsethik kann sie thematisieren, aber ihnen nicht wirksam begegnen. Vorgeschlagen wird die Verstärkung von Organisationethik durch eine Theorie institutioneller Pathologie. Institutionspathologisch aufgeklärte, „klinische“ Organisationsethik kann helfen, in Ethiktheorie und Praxis, etwa für Mitglieder von KEKs und Organisationethikberater, die Möglichkeiten der Beobachtung, Bewertung und ggf. Besserung von gestörten Verantwortungsverhältnissen erheblich zu erweitern.

          Translated abstract

          Definition of the problem

          Staff and patients in institutions of organized health care experience and express a variety of adverse conditions of these organizations. Within a theoretical framework of institutional pathology we can explain some of these “miserable conditions” as effects of the activities of organizations belonging to the political system (health policy) and to the economic system (health economy). Clinical ethics committees (CECs) cannot effectively handle such adversities or even address them properly. Standard organizational ethics can address them but cannot handle them effectively.

          Arguments

          I propose to strengthen organizational ethics by a theory of institutional pathology. Basic nosological distinctions such as disease, illness and sickness, whose primary reference is to biological organisms and persons, can be analogically extended to socially constituted entities (e.g. hospitals) in terms of functional deficiency, miserable conditions, and need for reform of such entities. A very promising focus for analysis are organizational disorders of responsibility allocation. This group of institutional pathological disorders engenders, amongst other kinds of miserable conditions, specifically morally relevant miserable conditions.

          Conclusion

          The institutional pathology paradigm, oriented to concrete institutions and organizations, can help “clinical” organizational ethics to considerably expand, in theoretical ethics as well as in ethically guided practice e.g. for members of CECs and organizational ethics advisors, the capacities for observing, evaluating and, if necessary, amending disturbed relations of responsibility.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Principles of Biomedical Ethics: Marking Its Fortieth Anniversary

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Organizational ethics: a literature review.

            The aim of the study was to report the results of a systematically conducted literature review of empirical studies about healthcare organizations' ethics and management or leadership issues. Electronic databases MEDLINE and CINAHL yielded 909 citations. After a two stage application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria 56 full-text articles were included in the review. No large research programs were identified. Most of the studies were in acute hospital settings from the 1990s onwards. The studies focused on ethical challenges, dilemmas in practice, employee moral distress and ethical climates or environments. Study samples typically consisted of healthcare practitioners, operational, executive and strategic managers. Data collection was mainly by questionnaires or interviews and most of the studies were descriptive, correlational and cross-sectional. There is need to develop conceptual clarity and a theoretical framework around the subject of organizational ethics and the breadth of the contexts and scope of the research needs to be increased. © The Author(s) 2011
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Clinical Medical Ethics: Its History and Contributions to American Medicine.

              In 1972, I created the new field of clinical medical ethics (CME) in the Department of Medicine at the University of Chicago. In my view, CME is an intrinsic part of medicine and is not a branch of bioethics or philosophical ethics or legal ethics. The relationship of patients with medically trained and licensed clinicians is at the very heart of CME. CME must be practiced and applied not by nonclinical bioethicists, but rather by licensed clinicians in their routine, daily encounters with inpatients and outpatients. CME must be practiced and applied by licensed clinicians in their routine, daily encounters with inpatients and outpatients. CME addresses many clinical issues such as truth-telling, informed consent, confidentiality, surrogate decision making, and end-of-life care, while also encouraging personal, humane, and compassionate interactions between experienced clinicians and patients. The goals of CME are to improve patient care and outcomes by helping physicians and other health professionals identify and respond to clinical-ethical challenges that arise in the ordinary care of patients. As Edmund Pellegrino, Peter A. Singer, and I wrote in the first issue of The Journal of Clinical Ethics, 30 years ago: "The central goal of CME is to improve the quality of patient care by identifying, analyzing, and contributing to the resolution of ethical problems that arise in the routine practice of clinical medicine." Similar to cardiology and oncology consultations, ethics consultations are a small component of a much larger field, and the process of consultations is certainly not at the core of cardiology or oncology or CME. In this article, I intend to discuss the origins of the field of CME, its goals and methods, the relationship between the broad field of CME and the much narrower practice of ethics consultation, the contributions of the MacLean Center at the University of Chicago in developing the field of CME, and, finally, how CME has improved the practice of medicine in the United States.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Matthias.Kettner@uni-wh.de
                Journal
                Ethik Med
                Ethik Med
                Ethik in Der Medizin
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0935-7335
                1437-1618
                12 April 2021
                12 April 2021
                : 1-17
                Affiliations
                GRID grid.412581.b, ISNI 0000 0000 9024 6397, Fakultät für Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, , Universität Witten/Herdecke, ; Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58448 Witten, Deutschland
                Article
                628
                10.1007/s00481-021-00628-z
                8040751
                33867687
                8986ea1d-c4ac-42e5-817e-46562038f884
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open Access Dieser Artikel wird unter der Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International Lizenz veröffentlicht, welche die Nutzung, Vervielfältigung, Bearbeitung, Verbreitung und Wiedergabe in jeglichem Medium und Format erlaubt, sofern Sie den/die ursprünglichen Autor(en) und die Quelle ordnungsgemäß nennen, einen Link zur Creative Commons Lizenz beifügen und angeben, ob Änderungen vorgenommen wurden.

                Die in diesem Artikel enthaltenen Bilder und sonstiges Drittmaterial unterliegen ebenfalls der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz, sofern sich aus der Abbildungslegende nichts anderes ergibt. Sofern das betreffende Material nicht unter der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz steht und die betreffende Handlung nicht nach gesetzlichen Vorschriften erlaubt ist, ist für die oben aufgeführten Weiterverwendungen des Materials die Einwilligung des jeweiligen Rechteinhabers einzuholen.

                Weitere Details zur Lizenz entnehmen Sie bitte der Lizenzinformation auf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.de.

                History
                : 24 November 2020
                : 18 March 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: Private Universität Witten/Herdecke gGmbH (3128)
                Categories
                Originalarbeit

                Ethics
                organisationsethik,moralverantwortung,sozialpathologie,drg-system,kommerzialisierung,organizational ethics,moral responsibility,institutional pathology,drg (diagnosis-related groups),commercialization

                Comments

                Comment on this article