Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. (1 other version)Das „framing“ der sechsmonatigen Karenzregel in der Lebertransplantation. Ein Beispiel für sprachlich vermittelte Deutungsmuster zur Eingrenzung des Indikationsgebietes.Nadia Primc - 2020 - Ethik in der Medizin 32 (3):239-253.
    Die deutschen Richtlinien zur Lebertransplantation sehen vor, dass Patient*innen mit alkoholbedingten Lebererkrankungen in der Regel eine sechsmonatige Karenz nachweisen müssen, bevor sie auf die Warteliste für eine Lebertransplantation aufgenommen werden können. Die international weit verbreitete Karenzregel wurde von Beginn an sehr kritisch diskutiert, da hiermit Patient*innen eine wirksame und potentiell lebensrettende Therapie zumindest vorübergehend vorenthalten wird. Sie kommt in der Praxis einer Eingrenzung der Indikation zur Lebertransplantation gleich. Aus der medizinischen Fachliteratur lassen sich vier Interpretationsrahmen rekonstruieren, die mittels Herausstellung bestimmter (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • (1 other version)The framing of the six-month abstinence rule in liver transplantation. An example of linguistically mediated patterns of interpretation used to limit indication area.Nadia Primc - 2020 - Ethik in der Medizin 32 (3):239-253.
    BackgroundThe German guidelines for liver transplantation stipulate that every patient with alcohol-related liver disease needs to prove evidence of a 6-month abstinence period before they can be admitted to the waiting list for liver transplantation. This internationally widespread abstinence rule has been criticised as it prevents patients at least temporarily from receiving an effective and potentially life-saving therapy. This poses the question of how this abstinence rule is depicted and justified by transplantation professionals.ArgumentsIn case of the 6‑month abstinence rule, guidelines (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Should responsibility be used as a tiebreaker in allocation of deceased donor organs for patients suffering from alcohol-related end-stage liver disease?Diehua Hu & Nadia Primc - 2023 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 26 (2):243-255.
    There is a long-standing debate concerning the eligibility of patients suffering from alcohol-related end-stage liver disease (ARESLD) for deceased donor liver transplantation. The question of retrospective and/or prospective responsibility has been at the center of the ethical discussion. Several authors argue that these patients should at least be regarded as partly responsible for their ARESLD. At the same time, the arguments for retrospective and/or prospective responsibility have been strongly criticized, such that no consensus has been reached. A third option was (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The dual role dilemma of liver transplantation health care professionals.Anil Batra, Immanuel Lang, Julia Fenchel & Annette Binder - 2023 - BMC Medical Ethics 24 (1):1-13.
    BackgroundSimilar to many other countries, in Germany patients with alcohol-related liver disease are obliged to prove their abstinence before being accepted on a waitlist for liver transplantation. Health care professionals (HCPs) must both treat patients and ensure that patients have proven their abstinence. The aim of this exploratory study was to develop a deeper understanding of how HCPs deal with this dual role.MethodsThe study used semi-structured interviews as the source of data. 11 healthcare professionals from ten of the 22 German (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Priority for Organ Donors in the Allocation of Organs: Priority Rules from the Perspective of Equality of Opportunity.Andreas Albertsen - 2023 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 48 (4):359-372.
    Should priority in the allocation of organs be given to those who have previously donated or declared their willingness to do so? This article examines the Israeli priority rule in light of two prominent critiques of priority rules, pertaining to failure to reciprocate and unfairness. The scope and content of these critiques are interpreted from the perspective of equality of opportunity. Because the Israeli priority rule may be reasonably criticized for unfairness and failing to reward certain behaviors, the article develops (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations