Moral Distress: Inability to Act or Discomfort with Moral Subjectivity?

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 734-742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Repenshek

Amidst the wealth of literature on the topic of moral distress in nursing, a single citation is ubiquitous, Andrew Jameton’s 1984 book Nursing practice. The definition Jameton formulated reads ‘... moral distress arises when one knows the right thing to do, but institutional constraints make it nearly impossible to pursue the right course of action’. Unfortunately, it appears that, despite the frequent use of Jameton’s definition of moral distress, the definition itself remains uncritically examined. It seems as if the context of how moral distress arises (i.e. anger, frustration etc.) has been co-opted as its definition. This current work suggests that the current definition is not moral distress as defined by Jameton, but rather, in large part, nursing’s discomfort with moral subjectivity in end-of-life decision making. A critical examination of how the Catholic tradition’s normative ethical framework accounts for moral subjectivity in end-of-life decision making serves to aid nursing’s discomfort and as a starting point to recontextualize moral distress.

Author(s):  
Chad D. Kollas ◽  
Beth Boyer Kollas

Growth in the size and wealth of the United States’ elderly population, coupled with a trend toward increasing patient autonomy, has created an environment for increased conflict in end-of-life decision-making. This chapter explores the required elements for making decisions at the end of life, including determination of medical decision-making capacity. Also discussed is the development of the legal reasoning that governs situations involving elderly patients who lack the capacity, but retain the right, to make medical decisions. The chapter describes the utility of the advance care planning process, by which elderly patients can make their preferences for medical treatment known in advance of conditions or illness that could result in cognitive impairment that would otherwise hamper their ability to participate personally in end-of-life decisions. Finally, a variety of forms of advance directives are described, critical tools in honoring the medical autonomy of elderly patients.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (12) ◽  
pp. 2733-2739 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katja Mehlis ◽  
Elena Bierwirth ◽  
Katsiaryna Laryionava ◽  
Friederike H.A. Mumm ◽  
Wolfgang Hiddemann ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Saira Weinzimmer ◽  
Susan M. Miller ◽  
Janice L. Zimmerman ◽  
Jay Hooker ◽  
Stacey Isidro ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 373-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliana Close ◽  
Ben P White ◽  
Lindy Willmott ◽  
Cindy Gallois ◽  
Malcolm Parker ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo increase knowledge of how doctors perceive futile treatments and scarcity of resources at the end of life. In particular, their perceptions about whether and how resource limitations influence end-of-life decision making. This study builds on previous work that found some doctors include resource limitations in their understanding of the concept of futility.SettingThree tertiary hospitals in metropolitan Brisbane, Australia.DesignQualitative study using in-depth, semistructured, face-to-face interviews. Ninety-six doctors were interviewed in 11 medical specialties. Transcripts of the interviews were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsDoctors’ perceptions of whether resource limitations were relevant to their practice varied, and doctors were more comfortable with explicit rather than implicit rationing. Several doctors incorporated resource limitations into their definition of futility. For some, availability of resources was one factor of many in assessing futility, secondary to patient considerations, but a few doctors indicated that the concept of futility concealed rationing. Doctors experienced moral distress due to the resource implications of providing futile treatment and the lack of administrative supports for bedside rationing.ConclusionsDoctors’ ability to distinguish between futility and rationing would be enhanced through regulatory support for explicit rationing and strategies to support doctors’ role in rationing at the bedside. Medical policies should address the distinction between resource limitations and futility to promote legitimacy in end-of-life decision making.


2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Udo Schuklenk ◽  
Johannes J. M. van Delden ◽  
Jocelyn Downie ◽  
Sheila McLean ◽  
Ross Upshur ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document