Duty of care trumps utilitarianism in multi-professional obesity management decisions

Nursing Ethics 29 (6):1401-1414 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Background Escalating levels of obesity place enormous and growing demands on Health care provision in the (U.K.) United Kingdom. Resources are limited with increasing and competing demands upon them. Ethical considerations underpin clinical decision making generally, but there is limited evidence regarding the relationship between these variables particularly in terms of treating individuals with obesity. Research aim To investigate the views of National Health Service (NHS) clinicians on navigating the ethical challenges and decision making associated with obesity management in adults with chronic illness. Research design A cross-sectional, multi-site survey distributed electronically. Participants A consensus sample of nurses, doctors, dietitians and final year students in two NHS Trusts and two Universities. Ethical considerations Ethical and governance approvals obtained from a National Ethics Committee (11NIR035), two universities and two teaching hospitals. Results Of the total ( n = 395) participants, the majority were nurses (48%), female (79%) and qualified clinicians (59%). Participants strongly considered the individual to have primary responsibility for a healthy weight and an obligation to attempt to maintain that healthy weight if they wish to access NHS care. Yet two thirds would not withhold treatment for patients with obesity. Discussion While clinicians were clear about patient responsibility and obligations, the majority prioritised their duty of care and would not invoke a utilitarian approach to decision making. This may reflect awareness of obesity as a multi-faceted entity, with responsibility for support and management shared amongst society in general. Conclusions The attitudes of this sample of clinicians complemented the concept of the health service as being built on a principle of community, with each treated according to their need. However limited resources challenge the concept of needs-based decisions consequently societal engagement is necessary to agree a pragmatic way forward.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A Duty to Adopt?Daniel Friedrich - 2013 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 30 (1):25-39.
Utilitarianism in media ethics and its discontents.Clifford G. Christians - 2007 - Journal of Mass Media Ethics 22 (2-3):113 – 131.
Re-Evaluating Professional Autonomy in Health Care.Henk Ten Have - 2000 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 21 (5):503-513.
Medical Samaritans: Is There A Duty To Treat?Kevin Williams - 2001 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 21 (3):393-413.
Chains of Trust and Duty in Health Information Management.Alan J. Green - 2009 - Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 3 (1).
Sustainability, Public Health, and the Corporate Duty to Assist.Julian Friedland - 2015 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 34 (2):215-236.
Many Duties of Care—Or A Duty of Care? Notes from the Underground.David Howarth - 2006 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 26 (3):449-472.
Patients' duties.Michael J. Meyer - 1992 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):541-555.
The Integrity Objection, Reloaded.Jill Hernandez - 2013 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 21 (2):145-162.
On the duty to care during epidemics.Daniel Messelken - 2018 - In Daniel Messelken & David T. Winkler (eds.), Ethical Challenges for Military Health Care Personnel : Dealing with Epidemics. London, U.K.: Routledge. pp. 144-163.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-05-28

Downloads
7 (#1,360,984)

6 months
3 (#1,002,413)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?