medigraphic.com
ISSN 2594-1518 (Electronic)
ISSN 1405-0099 (Print)

2016, Number 2

<< Back

Cir Gen 2016; 38 (2)

The bioethical dilemma facing the iatrogenesis of others - will my colleagues be as equal to my brothers?

Campos A

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page: 105-110
PDF size: 237.26 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The physician who blows the whistle poses a threat to the accused and to herself, and both parts know it. The dilemma consists in knowing whether, by the same iatrogenesis which originates the complaint, a report is of public interest, inasmuch as it can produce a benefice to the system. Even considering all conditions around the fact and all plausible scenarios of the consequences, it is not possible to elucidate the effect that a complaint will have. There is no relationship between reporting and the result sought with this intervention on a multifactorial iatrogenesis. It is not possible to know if an aggregation of incidental causes can override, by emerging factors, the desired effect. On the contrary, whistleblowing can cause self-organizing processes out of the disorder initially triggered which themselves can produce undesirable effects on the complainant and the system, with a final result that increases the fragility of both. It is more plausible that, in the light of considerations on the consequences, the moral agent seeking to nullify the effects on her, rather than resolve, dissolves the dilemma.


REFERENCES

  1. De Vega L. Fuente Ovejuna (ed. Rinaldo Froldi), 19ª ed., Madrid, Espasa-Calpe (Colección Austral), 1998.

  2. Acedo Castilla JF. El motín de Fuente Ovejuna en el teatro de Lope. La psicología de las muchedumbres y la naturaleza de sus delitos. En: Minervae Baeticae, Boletín de la Real Academia Sevillana de Buenas Letras. 2003; 31: 173-188.

  3. Fumagalli G. Errare humanum est, perseverare autem diabolicum. En: Chi l’ha detto? 10a ed. Milán: Ulrico Hoepli; 1989. p. 326.

  4. Bok S. Whistleblowing and Professional Responsibilities. En: Callahan D, Bok S. Ethics Teaching in Higher Education. Nueva York: Plenum Press; 1980. p. 277-295.

  5. Sanford J. New policy to require evaluations for late-career practitioners. Stanford Medicine News. July 16, 2012. http://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2012/07/new-policy-to-require-evaluations-for-late-career-practitioners.html

  6. Boodman SG. Aging doctors face greater scrutiny. Kaiser Health News. December 10, 2012. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2012/December/11/aging-doctors-face-greater-scrutiny.aspx

  7. Waljee JF, Greenfield LJ. Aging and surgeon performance. Adv Surg. 2007; 41: 189-198.

  8. Waljee JF, Greenfield LJ, Dimick JB, Birkmeyer JD. Surgeon age and operative mortality in the United States. Ann Surg. 2006; 244: 353-362.

  9. Choudhry NK, Fletcher RH, Soumerai SB. Systematic review: the relationship between clinical experience and quality of health care. Ann Intern Med. 2005; 142: 260-273.

  10. Plinio. Natural History. (tr. Rackham H.) Vol. II, Libro VII, Cap. 51, 168. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1961. p. 618-619.

  11. The Physician. Cap. 1. En: Hippocrates. Vol. II. (tr. Jones WHS) Londres: William Heinemann Ltd.; 1923, reimp. 1959. p. 310-313.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com