Tag: prayer

Bioethics Blogs

Jewish Guide to Practical Medical Decision Making

Check out
this new 368-page
book
 from Rabbi Jason Weiner: Jewish Guide to Practical
Medical Decision Making.


Due to rapid advances in the medical field, existing books on Jewish medical
ethics are quickly becoming outdated. 
Jewish
Guide to Practical Medical Decision Making
 seeks to remedy that by
presenting the most contemporary medical information and rabbinic rulings in an
accessible, user-friendly manner. 


Rabbi Weiner addresses a broad range of medical circumstances such as surrogacy
and egg donation, assisted suicide, and end-of-life decision making. Based on
his extensive training and practical familiarity inside a major hospital, Rabbi
Weiner provides clear and concise guidance to facilitate complex
decision-making for the most common medical dilemmas that arise in contemporary
society.


1. Facilitating Shared Decision-Making 

A. Understanding Terminology: Key Concepts to Facilitate
Collaborative Decision-Making

B. Truth-Telling: When Painful Medical Information Should
and Should Not Be Revealed 

C. Mental Illness: Determining Capacity and Proper Treatment
in Accordance with Jewish Law  


2. How Much Treatment? 

A. Risk and Self-Endangerment: Determining the
Appropriateness of Attempting Various Levels of Dangerous Medical Procedures

B. Making Decisions on Behalf of an Incapacitated Patient

C. Pediatrics: Jewish Law and Determining a Child’s Consent
and Treatment 

D. Palliative Care and Hospice in Jewish Law and Thought


3. Prayer  

A. Is Prayer Ever Futile? On the Efficacy of Prayer for
the Terminally Ill 

B. Viduy: Confessional Prayers Prior to Death


4.  At the End of Life

A. Advance Directives and POLST Forms  

B. End-of-Life Decision-Making: DNR, Comfort Measures,
Nutrition/Hydration, and Defining “Terminal” in accordance with Jewish Law

C. Withholding vs. Withdrawing: Deactivating a
Ventilator and Cessation of Dialysis and Cardiac Defibrillators at the End of
Life

D. Case

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics News

Gene Editing Might Mean My Brother Would’ve Never Existed

August 10, 2017

Be the first to like.
Share

Responses to this feat followed well-trodden trails. Hype over “designer babies.” Hope over new tools to cure and curb disease. Some spin, some substance and a good dose of science-speak. But for me, this breakthrough is not just about science or medicine or the future of humankind. It’s about faith and family, love and loss. Most of all, it’s about the life and memory of my brother.

Jason was born with muscle-eye-brain disease. In his case, this included muscular dystrophy, cerebral palsy, severe nearsightedness, hydrocephalus and intellectual disability. He lived past his first year thanks to marvels of modern medicine. A shunt surgery to drain excess cerebrospinal fluid building up around his brain took six attempts, but the seventh succeeded. Aside from those surgeries’ complications and intermittent illnesses due to a less-than-robust immune system, Jason was healthy. Healthy and happy — very happy. His smile could light up a room. Yet, that didn’t stop people from thinking that his disability made him worse off. My family and those in our religious community prayed for Jason. Strangers regularly came up to test their fervor. Prayer “circles” frequently had his name on their lists. We wanted him to be healed. But I now wonder: What, precisely, were we praying for?

… Read More

Image via TIME The author (left), with his brother Jason Courtesy of Joel Reynolds 

Be the first to like.
Share

TIME

Tags: , , , , , ,

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

The Americans with Disabilities Act: Before and After the Fall

For the past many years, I have publicly and privately acknowledged the July 26th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Public recognition of the anniversary was an important part of my role as the Administrator of the Administration for Community Living (ACL), the federal agency that funds a variety of important programs that support people with disabilities and their families. Two years ago, at the 25th anniversary, I attended community and campus events in Lawrence and highlighted the anniversary in Washington, D.C. 
One of my favorite aspects of this annual recognition is the company I keep. Many of the individuals who fought at the local, state and federal level for the civil rights of people with disabilities still walk and roll among us. Over the course of my seven years in Washington and during my time in Kansas state government, I have had the pleasure of meeting and collaborating with some of the strongest advocates for people with disabilities in this country. To know the people who created and fought for the ADA is nothing less than an honor. Many of the leaders in this movement are now my friends.

Blame the Mouse

Beginning in August 2016, the benefits of the Americans with Disabilities Act were made real for me. On August 2nd of last year, I fell from a ladder (blame the dead mouse in my attic) and sustained a serious injury to my right leg. I shattered the top of my tibia and fractured my ankle. I was in the acute care hospital for six days and inpatient rehab for 12.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Good Death, or Assisted Suicide?

The Case of Mr. Perry and his Pacemaker

Tarris Rosell, PhD, DMin
Rosemary Flanigan Chair at the Center for Practical Bioethics

NOTE: Dr. Rosell, a bioethics consultant and educator, will present the case of Mr. Perry for ethics discussion and likely debate on Thursday, June 22, 2017 at 7:00 PM in the artfully rebuilt Westport Presbyterian Church, 201 Westport Rd, Kansas City, MO. Bring your perspectives, arguments, and personal stories of moral medical dilemma. Admission is free. All are invited and welcome.

Mr. Perry (not his real name) was 83 years old and had several medical problems. He had spent the past several months in and out of hospitals and rehab. Prior to that, he lived independently in a small Midwestern town. Widowed many years ago, he subsequently enjoyed the company of a lovely lady friend who lived down the street from the Perry home. He had five adult children and numerous grandchildren.

Life should have been relatively good for this octogenarian. But life was not good. Not anymore. “My body is all worn out. I’m worn out. Don’t want to do this anymore, Doc. They say I can’t go home and be safe. And I’m NOT going to a nursing home. No way! Just stop that little gadget that shocks me and the part that keeps my heart going. I want them stopped. Yes, the pacemaker, too. A magnet will stop it, right? Just do it. Please.”

Tired of Fighting

Mr. Perry had a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) implanted a few years ago. It included an electrical pacing component for heart rhythms, on which the patient was 100% dependent.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

‘Examening’ the New Year!

By Michael P. McCarthy

The New Year offers a clean slate, a welcome opportunity to try something new.  Given the title of the blog, Reflective MedEd, I would like to offer a way of refocusing and reorienting oneself through reflecting on the experiences of the day.  As Hedy Wald described in her blog post, reflection enhances a variety of skills that are essential for continuing professional identity formation for medical students, educators, and practitioners alike.  The process of the examen serves as a way to reflect by reviewing hour-by-hour the events, circumstances, and experiences of the day…

The examen begins by quieting myself, and then reviewing slowly the events of the day.  I start with an objective review, what I did, and a subjective view, how I felt (positively, negatively, happy, sad, joyous, frustrated, etc.) about the day’s events.  I recall experiences and feelings, and then identify one thing for which I want to be especially attentive   a meeting coming-up; a difficult exam; a family crisis; etc.  The context of the examen is a prayerful one that is attentive to sources of meaning and motivation.  Cultivating a habit of reflecting on my daily experiences through the examen expresses a desire to become more aware of who I am and who I am becoming, two essential components of formation.

The examen was developed first by St. Ignatius Loyola in sixteenth century as a component of formation for Jesuit priests who in addition worked as educators, chaplains, even physicians.  Their work flowed from their sense of meaning in “finding God in all things.”

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

BioethicsTV (January 2-6, 2017): Violating promises, coma v. PVS, transplant evaluation, and whether to abort

by Craig Klugman, Ph.D.

Pure Genius (Season1; Episode 10- 1/5). In this episode, Dr. Channarayapatra is working with a patient in lung failure. Due to exposure to toxins dumped in the ground beneath her neighborhood, the patient’s lung tissue is disintegrating. Bunker Hill hospital is attempting to build the world’s first implantable, artificial lung but has not had success. With her lung function decreasing, the patient may soon face one of two options: death or ECMO—a process where a machine oxygenates her blood outside of the body. The viewer is told that ECMO can only be used for a maximum of two weeks. The patient tells Channarayapatra in no uncertain terms that she does not want to be on ECMO. Channarayapatra promises that she will not put the patient on ECMO. However, when the crisis appears and the patient’s lungs fall apart, Dr. Channarayapatra goes back on her promise and begins ECMO.

There are three concerns with this scenario. First, a doctor should never make a promise to a patient that she or he cannot keep. Second, a doctor should keep promises made to patients. Third, if a competent and capacitated patient has clearly rejected an invasive medical treatment, then the patient’s right to refuse consent and to reject that intervention must be honored, even if it results in the patient’s death. Otherwise, the physician commits a battery by touching a patient without permission and also violates the patient’s autonomy.

Of course, this being a show where the ends always justify the means, an artificial lung is created and implanted in the patient (without any animal or preliminary human testing of course).

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Web Roundup: Something Rotten – Scent, Morality, Good and Evil by Sara M Bergstresser

A well-known quote from Hamlet is “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.” This, of course, refers to the illegitimate and immoral reign of the fictional King Claudius, Hamlet’s uncle. So, while there is plenty of current relevance related to the political and social turmoil hinted at by this line, instead let’s talk about another aspect that I find particularly fascinating — the connection of scent and odor to ideas of morality, good, and evil.

In an odd turn of events, I recently found myself trying to explain to some chemistry students why a quote saying that someone “smells of sulfur” means that they are diabolical, hellish, or somehow antichrist-like. Why sulfur? No, there is really no connection to sulfur’s having an identical number of valence electrons to oxygen, though that would make an interesting story. Some explanation of the history of sulphurous scent as diabolical can be found here: The Smell of Hell: Does Satan Smell of Rotten Eggs?   Connections between scent and good and evil actually abound. Fragrantica has a number of excellent articles about the historical and cultural meanings of scent, including Elena Vosnaki’s A Diabolical Whiff: Scents of Hell:

It was sorcerers during the Middle Ages who, suspected to be in cahoots with the devil, were considered to be sulphurous smelling themselves. Given that these were often “wise women” dealing in pharmacopoeia, of which sulphurous materials did make a part, wouldn’t it be evident that handling them would lend them that odor? Try to prove it to the ecclesiastical courts!

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

In The Journals – November by Christine Sargent

Hello trusty readers. Check out November’s haul for “In The Journals,” and be sure to check out the special issue of Science, Technology, and Human Values: Feminist Postcolonial Technosciences.

 

American Ethnologist:

Memory, body, and the online researcher: Following Russian street demonstrations via social media (open access)

Patty A. Gray

The Moscow street demonstrations of 2011–12 were the largest public gatherings in Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union. They were also the largest-ever gathering of Russians on social media. While using the Internet to follow such large-scale social movements remotely, researchers experience social media as a context in which anthropology happens. They may think about “being there” in new ways that shift their focus to their own processes of memory making and sense of bodily presence. Experiencing and remembering social media in the body challenges the distinctions we might otherwise make between virtual and physical encounters.

Royal pharmaceuticals: Bioprospecting, rights, and traditional authority in South Africa

Christopher Morris

The translation of international biogenetic resource rights to a former apartheid homeland is fostering business partnerships between South African traditional leaders and multinational pharmaceutical companies. In the case of one contentious resource, these partnerships are entrenching, and in some instances expanding, apartheid-associated boundaries and configurations of power. The state and corporate task of producing communities amenable to biodiversity commercialization and conservation is entangled with segregationist laws and spatial planning. Rather than exclusion and the closure of ethnic boundaries, resource rights in this context foreground forced enrollment and the expansion of indigenous group-membership as modes of capitalist accumulation in an extractive economy.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

A reader’s guide to the anthropology of ethics and morality – Part I by C. Jason Throop

Editors note: We asked several scholars which readings they would recommend to students or colleagues interested in familiarizing themselves with the anthropology of ethics and morality. This is response we received from C. Jason Throop, Professor of Anthropology at UCLA. Reading lists from other scholars will be forthcoming in this series.

 

Directly tied to my efforts to analyze moral aspects of pain and suffering in the context of my ethnographic work in Yap, in the fall of 2007, I decided to offer a new graduate seminar at UCLA entitled “Morality, Virtue, and Subjectivity.” My goal at the time was to put together a seminar that would explore the ways that philosophical and anthropological literatures on morality, virtue, and subjectivity might critically inform one another. There were two major problems I faced, however, when it came to selecting relevant readings. First, on the philosophical side, there was the problem of selecting which readings, out of a vast existing literature, would be deemed both accessible and anthropologically relevant to the students. Assuming that most students had very little exposure to longstanding debates between virtue ethical, consequentialist/utilitarian, and deontological traditions in philosophy, I had to find a way to cover some of the basics without overwhelming them. Second, on the anthropological side, I struggled with the fact that there were very few examples of anthropologists directly engaging the topic in either an analytically sophisticated or an explicitly philosophically informed way. The result was a syllabus that covered much more philosophical than anthropological ground, with the anthropological contributions more often than not merely hinting at, rather than explicitly engaging in, a discussion of the key philosophical issues.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

A Selfish Request for Honest Conversations

Rev. Shanna Steitz 
On Monday of this last week, I had to fill out a medical advance directive for my husband, Ryan. He was in the hospital at North Kansas City, and they needed a document on file. We have documents at home, but the form was easiest because it was in front of us and immediate. I had to smile when I read the form and saw the small print at the bottom: “This document is provided as a service by the Center for Practical Bioethics.“ I smiled because I was headed to the Center’s annual dinner the very next night.  
If you aren’t familiar with the Center, it is a nonprofit, free-standing and independent organization nationally recognized for its work in practicalbioethics. For more than 30 years, the Center has helped patients and their families, healthcare professionals, policymakers, and corporate leaders grapple with difficult issues in healthcare and research involving patients. I am so proud that several members of our congregation are involved with this important organization:  Myra Christopher is the former President and CEO and still on the staff, Dr. Sandra Stites serves on the Board of Directors, and Rev. George Flanagan is a Center Fellow and formerly on the staff. I saw several other members and friends of our congregation in attendance.  
When I got home from the dinner, my 12-year old son Jacob was up waiting for me. He wanted to know about the evening. We discussed the Center and what our friends there did. It was an interesting conversation…one we’ve had many times before, but it was especially unique given that his dad was spending a third night in the hospital. Ryan

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.