With the increasing professionalization of clinical ethics, some hospitals and health systems utilize both ethics committees and professional clinical ethicists to address their ethics needs. Drawing upon historical critiques of ethics committees and their own experiences, the authors argue that, in ethics programs with one or more professional clinical ethicists, ethics committees should be dissolved when they fail to meet minimum standards of effectiveness. The authors outline several criteria for assessing effectiveness, describe the benefits of a model that places primary (...) responsibility for ethics work with professional clinical ethicists—the PCE-primary model, and offer suggestions for alternative ethics program structures that empower healthcare professionals to contribute to ethics work in ways more tailored to their strengths and skills while minimizing the shortcomings of ethics committees. (shrink)

The article is dedicated to the application questions of a case study method known as casuistry. In its long tradition, it focuses on an influential variant of the early modern period and reconstructs its functionality. In the course of reading recent receptions, it is noted that some studies speak of a “casuistic revival” in moral case deliberation in health care. As a result of this revival, casuistry has been modified in such a way that it guides case discussions in practice (...) with the help of a tripartite methodology. However, as it turns out, casuistry, a case comparison method of ethical judgement based on reasoning logic, is less suitable for moral case deliberations in direct patient care. This stems from the fact that casuistry is a detailed procedure of ethical learning beneficial to institutionalized ethics committees or similar forms of ethics consultation in health care. (shrink)

Ethics networks have emerged over the last few decades as a mechanism for individuals and institutions over various regions, cities and states to converge on healthcare-related ethical issues. However, little is known about the development and nature of such networks. In an effort to fill the gap in the knowledge about such networks, a survey was conducted that evaluated the organizational structure, missions and functions, as well as the outcomes/products of ethics networks across the country. Eighteen established bioethics networks were (...) identified via consensus of three search processes and were approached for participation. The participants completed a survey developed for the purposes of this study and distributed via SurveyMonkey. Responses were obtained from 10 of the 18 identified and approached networks regarding topic areas of: Network Composition and Catchment Areas; Network Funding and Expenses; Personnel; Services; and Missions and Accomplishments. Bioethics networks are designed primarily to bring ethics education and support to professionals and hospitals. They do so over specifically defined areas—states, regions, or communities—and each is concerned about how to stay financially healthy. At the same time, the networks work off different organizational models, either as stand-alone organizations or as entities within existing organizational structures. (shrink)