404 resultados para medical concept
Resumo:
The construction of menopause as a long-term risk to health and the adoption of discourses of prevention has made necessary a decision by women about medical treatment; specifically regarding the use of hormone replacement therapy. In a study of general practitioners’ accounts of menopause and treatment in Australia, women's ‘choice’, ‘informed decision-making’ and ‘empowerment’ were key themes through which primary medical care for women at menopause was presented. These accounts create a position for women defined by the concept of individual choice and an ethic of autonomy. These data are a basis for theorising more generally in this paper. We critically examine the construct of ‘informed decision-making’ in relation to several approaches to ethics including bioethics and a range of feminist ethics. We identify the intensification of power relations produced by an ethic of autonomy and discuss the ways these considerations inform a feminist ethics of decision-making by women. We argue that an ‘ethic of autonomy’ and an ‘offer of choice’ in relation to health care for women at menopause, far from being emancipatory, serves to intensify power relations. The dichotomy of choice, to take or not to take hormone replacement therapy, is required to be a choice and is embedded in relations of power and bioethical discourse that construct meanings about what constitutes decision-making at menopause. The deployment of the principle of autonomy in medical practice limits decision-making by women precisely because it is detached from the construction of meaning and the self and makes invisible the relations of power of which it is a part.
Resumo:
In a medical negligence context, and under the causation provisions enacted pursuant to Civil Liability Legislation in most Australian jurisdictions, the normative concept of “scope of liability” requires a consideration of whether or not and why a medical practitioner should be responsible for a patient’s harm. As such, it places a limit on the extent to which practitioners are deemed liable for a breach of the duty of care owed by them, in circumstances where a legal factual connection between that breach and the causation of a patient’s harm has already been shown. It has been said that a determination of causation requires ‘the identification and articulation of an evaluative judgement by reference to “the purposes and policy of the relevant part of the law”’: Wallace v Kam (2013) 297 ALR 383, 388. Accordingly, one of the normative factors falling within scope of liability is an examination of the content and purpose of the rule or duty of care violated – that is, its underlying policy and whether this supports an attribution of legal responsibility upon a practitioner. In this context, and with reference to recent jurisprudence, this paper considers: the policy relevant to a practitioner’s duty of care in each of the areas of diagnosis, treatment and advice; how this has been used to determine an appropriate scope of liability for the purpose of the causation inquiry in medical negligence claims; and whether such an approach is problematic for medical standards or decision-making.
Resumo:
The announcement in the 2009 federal budget to allow nurse practitioners and midwives access to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and the Medicare Benefits Scheme,1and the subsequent announcement of a November 2010 start date,2has brought non-medical prescribing into the public arena. Non-medical prescribing is not a new concept in Australia as nurse practitioners, podiatrists and optometrists have been authorised to prescribe under various state legislations for some time. However, state legislation is not uniform in relation to authorisation or formulary. Midwives are currently seeking prescribing rights,3and other groups such as physiotherapists and pharmacists are likely to seek them in the future.