Suchergebnisse

"Ethics support staff often help others to deal with moral challenges. However, they themselves can also experience moral challenges when practicing ethics support. Facilitators of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) sometimes for example experience ethical questions when it comes to (breaking) confidentiality. Facilitators might find themselves compelled to intervene or act upon things they hear or see whilst facilitating a MCD. For example, a MCD facilitator finds out that a participant does something illegal. Or, what to do if a MCD facilitator is asked to inform the Inspectorate about details of a MCD? When is a facilitator allowed or obligated to break confidentiality and share information with others? How to make such a decision? And, if allowed to break confidentiality, how to do this in a morally sound way? Currently there are no moral guidelines on how to act upon these questions. We conducted empirical research that explores moral challenges of MCD facilitators related to confidentiality and develops a moral compass which provides directions to approach these challenges. Data collection consists of three complementary methods: * analyses of 3 a 4 audiotaped and transcribed MCD sessions about how and when to break confidentiality; * in-depth interviews about the topic; * focus group to validate the findings and co-create a moral compass. In our presentation, we will reflect upon both the theoretical and normative considerations concerning confidentiality in ethics support and the empirical results of this study. Furthermore, we will present a preliminary version of a moral compass in order to strengthen the moral competency of MCD facilitators. "

"In Europe, Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) has been well-known and established as a form of Clinical Ethics Support (CES) and implemented in many international (health care) institutions. Since 2007 Amsterdam UMC organizes training for professionals to become a facilitator of MCD. To support and asses the development of those future facilitators MCD, an instrument has been developed which can be used by both trainees and trainers. The instrument consists of a self-reflection form and an observation form. Both forms are almost identical and contain a part of open questions reflecting upon the personal learning goals of the trainee and a part of 56 closed questions. The part of closed questions contains concrete descriptions of preferred skills and attitude of the MCD facilitator trainee, related to MCD in general and the specific steps of the Dilemma method and the Socratic Dialogue in particular. Special attention is being paid to concrete actions for fostering a dialogue and deepening the moral inquiry. The instrument can also be used by trained and more experienced facilitators of MCD to reflect upon their acquired skills and attitude, and indirectly on the quality of CES they provide. In this presentation we will present the instrument and share our experiences in using the two forms in order to train and assess (the quality of) facilitators of MCD. Furthermore, we will present preliminary results of the analysis of more than 1200 forms collected in the past decade from trainings on national and international level. "

"The areas of Research Ethics and Research Integrity (RE+RI) are rapidly evolving. Guidelines, standards, and laws have been drafted in many countries, regions and institutions. However, the regulatory proliferation does not necessarily yield clear guidance for practice: researchers often lack up-to-date and easily accessible information and guidance on how to apply principles and norms. The same is true for RE+RI evaluation committees, who lack easy access to case studies. The Embassy of Good Science is an online initiative to address these problems. The Semantic MediaWiki platform brings together, and makes smart connections between, relevant guidelines and regulations, cases and scenarios, and teaching materials. The platform provides practical information about how to apply norms and principles in every day practice and how to teach about them. For example, The Embassy contains cases and scenarios on researchers' day-to-day dilemmas, a discussion forum where researchers can share experiences, and easily adaptable teaching resources. Developed in consultation with stakeholders, the Embassy is managed by the European funded EnTIRE project. The initial content has been gathered via systematic reviews and is continually added to and updated by users. In the long-term, The Embassy will be community-owned and sustainable. The Embassy primarily supports researchers and RE+RI committee members. The platform also presents the opportunity to compare RE+RI principles, norms and practices worldwide, facilitating mutual learning and making the diversity of the RE+RI regulatory framework apparent. In this session, we will describe and demonstrate The Embassy's value for practice, education and policy. "