Literature DB >> 25274879

Four models of family interests.

Daniel Groll1.   

Abstract

In this article, I distinguish between 4 models for thinking about how to balance the interests of parents, families, and a sick child: (1) the oxygen mask model; (2) the wide interests model; (3) the family interests model; and (4) the direct model. The oxygen mask model - which takes its name from flight attendants' directives to parents to put on their own oxygen mask before putting on their child's - says that parents should consider their own interests only insofar as doing so is, ultimately, good for the sick child. The wide interests model suggests that in doing well by my child I am at the very same time doing well by myself. My interests can, and plausibly do, encompass the interests of others; they are, to that extent, wide. There is, then, no sharp separation between the interests of the sick child and the interests of other family members. In the family interests model, families themselves are seen as having interests that are neither identical to the sum, nor a simple function, of the interests of individual family members. The family has goals, values, and aspirations that are essentially corporate rather than individual. According to this model, these family interests can explain why sacrifices can sometimes be demanded of some family members for the sake of others in a medical setting. Finally, the direct model takes a simpler view of family members' interests; it claims that these interests matter simply on their own and should be taken into account in making treatment decisions for a sick child. This model openly considers the competing interests that parents and other family members often have when caring for a sick child, and advocates for weighing those interests when making decisions for and about the sick child. While there is room for all four models at the bedside, I argue that the direct model should be highlighted in clinical decision-making.
Copyright © 2014 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  best interest; child; ethics; family; law

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25274879     DOI: 10.1542/peds.2014-1394C

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  6 in total

1.  Is There Ever a Role for the Unilateral Do Not Attempt Resuscitation Order in Pediatric Care?

Authors:  Jonathan M Marron; Emma Jones; Joanne Wolfe
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 3.612

2.  Utility Estimation for Pediatric Vesicoureteral Reflux: Methodological Considerations Using an Online Survey Platform.

Authors:  Rohit Tejwani; Hsin-Hsiao S Wang; Jessica C Lloyd; Paul J Kokorowski; Caleb P Nelson; Jonathan C Routh
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Returning a Genomic Result for an Adult-Onset Condition to the Parents of a Newborn: Insights From the BabySeq Project.

Authors:  Ingrid A Holm; Amy McGuire; Stacey Pereira; Heidi Rehm; Robert C Green; Alan H Beggs
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 7.124

4.  Ethical Issues in Newborn Sequencing Research: The Case Study of BabySeq.

Authors:  Lainie Friedman Ross; Ellen Wright Clayton
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 5.  The theorisation of 'best interests' in bioethical accounts of decision-making.

Authors:  Giles Birchley
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 2.652

6.  Physicians Perceptions of Shared Decision-Making in Neonatal and Pediatric Critical Care.

Authors:  Claire A Richards; Helene Starks; M Rebecca O'Connor; Erica Bourget; Ross M Hays; Ardith Z Doorenbos
Journal:  Am J Hosp Palliat Care       Date:  2017-10-08       Impact factor: 2.090

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.