Antibiotics Are Used Excessively In Terminally Ill ICU Patients And Create Potential Harm To Others

Author(s):  
Michael S. Niederman ◽  
Moshe C. Ornstein
2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 598-615
Author(s):  
Gavin Heron ◽  
Claire Lightowler

Abstract Concerns have been raised about the quality of child-care professionals’ critical thinking and analytical skills. This study examines the critical thinking demonstrated by professionals when discussing risk in relation to vulnerable children. Data were collected from thirty consultation meetings, each of which focused on assessing the risks of a child who presented a serious threat of harm to others. Discourse analysis is used to examine the way in which critical thinking about risk is discussed at the consultation meetings. The findings suggest that critical thinking is demonstrated by professionals in ways that differentiate between potential harm and actual harm, and in relation to harm children pose to themselves and to other people. Also, the willingness of professionals to ask relevant questions and challenge each other is an important way of prompting individuals to demonstrate critical thinking. However, professionals tend to demonstrate a relatively narrow conceptualisation of critical thinking. This narrow conceptualisation cannot be reduced solely to the abilities or traits of an individual or professional group and it is argued that the bureaucratic and procedural demands of organisations in relation to vulnerable children may be an important factor in limiting the way professionals demonstrate critical thinking.


2003 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
◽  
◽  
◽  
◽  
...  

AbstractDuring the past decades the Western countries have paid attention to their Mental Health legislation, in particular, by making changes concerning involuntary treatment. In Western countries legislation allows involuntary treatmentof the mentally ill. Involuntary psychiatric treatment is motivated by either potential harm to others (for the good of society) or by need for treatment and/or potential self-harm (for the good of the patient). The aims of this study were to describe to what extent the danger to others criterion is used as a motivation for involuntary hospitalization and detainment in Finland, and to what kind of patients this criterion is applied. The study involves a retrospective chart review of all the treatment periods of a six month admission sample in three Finnish university hospitals. We found that potential harm to others has been rarely used as a motivation for involuntary referral or detainment together with other motivations, and virtually never as the sole motivation. With the exception of gender, which was most often male, patients with potential harm to others did not differ significantly from other involuntarily treated patients. Coercion (defined as seclusion, the use of restraints, forced medication, physical restraint or restrictions in leaving the ward) was not used with these patients more regularly than with the patients motivated by the other criteria. Length of stay (LOS) in a psychiatric hospital did not differ between the patients determined harmful to others and the other involuntarily treated patients.


Author(s):  
Harvey S. James

Although an extensive literature examines how moral character and environmental context relates to ethical awareness, judgment and behaviour, very little work focuses on the ethics of farmers. Understanding farmer ethics is important because farmers face unique pressures and constraints that affect their ethical judgments and behaviours. Research shows that there are different types of ethical problems that farmers have to deal with, such as actions that cause harm or potential harm to others, the environment and non-human animals, and actions that are defined as wrong by law, contract or agreement. Important pressures and constraints affecting farmer ethics include increasing production costs and land prices, rising debt and worsening financial health, more stringent government rules and regulations, and reduced options for producing and marketing agricultural products.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anastasia Shuster ◽  
Dino J. Levy

Abstract Why would people tell the truth when there is an obvious gain in lying and no risk of being caught? Previous work suggests the involvement of two motives, self-interest and regard for others. However, it remains unknown if these motives are related or distinctly contribute to (dis)honesty, and what are the neural instantiations of these motives. Using a modified Message Game task, in which a Sender sends a dishonest (yet profitable) or honest (less profitable) message to a Receiver, we found that these two motives contributed to dishonesty independently. Furthermore, the two motives involve distinct brain networks: the LPFC tracked potential value to self, whereas the rTPJ tracked potential losses to other, and individual differences in motives modulated these neural responses. Finally, activity in the vmPFC represented a balance of the two motives unique to each participant. Taken together, our results suggest that (dis)honest decisions incorporate at least two separate cognitive and neural processes—valuation of potential profits to self and valuation of potential harm to others.


2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 1074-1080 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zachary O. Binney ◽  
Tammie E. Quest ◽  
Paul L. Feingold ◽  
Timothy Buchman ◽  
Alyssa A. Majesko

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vivian Pontes ◽  
Nicolas Pontes ◽  
Dominique A. Greer ◽  
Amanda Beatson

Purpose Although preferential treatment has been considered a positive relationship marketing tactic, this research aims to examine how perceived harm to others as a result of preferential treatment invokes consumers’ negative moral emotions and negative attitudes towards the service provider. Design/methodology/approach Four studies are presented in this research. A pilot study first provides empirical evidence that customers who receive preferential treatment are aware of potential harm caused to other customers. Three experimental studies then test the hypothesis that shame and embarrassment mediate the effect of perceived harm to others on consumers’ responses to earned and unearned preferential treatment, respectively. Findings The present studies demonstrate that consumers naturally scan the environment and seek out information about others when judging their own experience; consequently, when preferential treatment is perceived to cause harm to others, it can trigger negative moral emotions. In particular, the authors show that shame mediates the effect of perceived harm to others when preferential treatment is earned, whereas embarrassment mediates this effect when preferential treatment is unearned. Research limitations/implications The results of this research contribute to the literature on earned and unearned preferential treatment and negative moral emotions. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first research to show that negative moral emotions may arise because of perceptions of harm to other customers, particularly in the context of earned preferential treatment. The authors demonstrate that ordinary shopping contexts have the potential to elicit these negative emotions, raising concerns about ethical and moral practices in service environments. Practical implications When designing relationship marketing programs incorporating preferential treatment, firms need to consider both the ethics of justice and the ethics of care. Guidelines considering ethics of care should be developed for employees to ensure appropriate training to deliver preferential treatment effectively and avoiding situations causing potential harm to others. Strategies could include encouraging employees to better scan the servicescape to identify if other customers’ needs should be attended first, and providing clearer justifications when administering preferential treatment. The provision of choices such as delayed redemption and passing on benefits to others can help minimise harm and potentially enhance customer service experience. Originality/value The studies presented here are the first to examine the role of perceived harm to others as an antecedent of consumers’ negative responses to preferential treatment. In particular, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to show that negative moral emotions may arise in the context of earned preferential treatment, calling into question some basic principles of relationship marketing.


Author(s):  
James L. Werth

The purpose of this chapter is to provide the reader with an introduction to the issue of theduty to protectas it applies to situations involving clients who may pose a potential harm to others or possible harm to themselves. Two famous court cases are used to introduce the material. In addition to reviewing basic legal, regulatory, and ethical principles, the chapter contains information on standard and atypical kinds of duty to protect situations, identifies assessment and intervention considerations, and provides resources for more information. After reading the chapter, professionals should have a clearer picture of what to do when faced with clients who may harm themselves or others.


2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Bach ◽  
Jaime L. Anderson

This study evaluated the Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder (SASPD) proposed for ICD-11 and the Level of Personality Functioning Scale–Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF) developed for DSM-5 Section III and their relationships with external correlates. We used a clinical sample (N = 150; 33% women) of 65 psychiatric outpatients and 85 incarcerated addicts, who self-reported the SASPD and the LPFS-BF. We conducted correlation and regression analyses in order to determine the relative associations of these two measures with relevant external criteria. SASPD predominantly captured externalizing and other-related problems (e.g., potential harm to others), whereas LPFS-BF predominantly captured internalizing and self-related problems (e.g., identity and distress). Generally, LPFS-BF explained more variance of the external criteria relative to SASPD. The findings seem to reflect that the ICD-11 oriented SASPD emphasizes interpersonal and aggressive features, whereas the DSM-5–oriented LPFS-BF emphasizes self-pathology and distress. More conclusive findings warrant interview-rated personality functioning.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document