14 results on '"Ives, Jonathan"'
Search Results
2. Mapping, framing, shaping: a framework for empirical bioethics research projects
- Author
-
Huxtable, Richard and Ives, Jonathan
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Setting standards for empirical bioethics research: a response to Carter and Cribb
- Author
-
Dunn, Michael, Ives, Jonathan, Molewijk, Bert, and Schildmann, Jan
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus
- Author
-
Ives, Jonathan, Dunn, Michael, Molewijk, Bert, Schildmann, Jan, Bærøe, Kristine, Frith, Lucy, Huxtable, Richard, Landeweer, Elleke, Mertz, Marcel, Provoost, Veerle, Rid, Annette, Salloch, Sabine, Sheehan, Mark, Strech, Daniel, de Vries, Martine, and Widdershoven, Guy
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. Fallacious, misleading and unhelpful: The case for removing 'systematic review' from bioethics nomenclature.
- Author
-
Birchley, Giles and Ives, Jonathan
- Subjects
- *
SYSTEMATIC reviews , *SOCIAL sciences , *TERMS & phrases , *QUALITY assurance , *LITERATURE reviews , *PHILOSOPHY , *RESEARCH bias , *BIOETHICS , *MEDICAL research - Abstract
Attempts to conduct systematic reviews of ethical arguments in bioethics are fundamentally misguided. All areas of enquiry need thorough and informative literature reviews, and efforts to bring transparency and systematic methods to bioethics are to be welcomed. Nevertheless, the raw materials of bioethical articles are not suited to methods of systematic review. The eclecticism of philosophy may lead to suspicion of philosophical methods in bioethics. Because bioethics aims to influence medical and scientific practice it is tempting to adopt scientific language and methods. One manifestation is the increasing innovation in, and use of, systematic reviews of ethical arguments in bioethics. Yet bioethics, as a broadly philosophical area of enquiry, is unsuited to systematic review. Bioethical arguments are evaluative, so notions of quality and bias are inapplicable. Bioethical argument is conceptual rather than numerical, and the classification of concepts is itself a process of argument that cannot aspire to neutrality. Any 'systematic review' of ethical arguments in bioethics thus falls short of that name. Furthermore, labels matter. Although the bioethics research community may find that adopting the language and the outward methods of clinical science offers apparent prospects of credibility, policy influence and funding, we argue that such misdirection carries risks and is unlikely to pay dividends in the long term. Bioethical sources are amenable to the review methods of the social sciences, and it is on these methods that specific methods of bioethics literature review should be built. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. The moral distress model: An empirically informed guide for moral distress interventions.
- Author
-
Morley, Georgina, Bradbury‐Jones, Caroline, and Ives, Jonathan
- Subjects
ETHICS ,INTENSIVE care nursing ,NURSES' attitudes ,FEMINISM ,MATHEMATICAL models ,INTERVIEWING ,UNCERTAINTY ,NURSING practice ,PHENOMENOLOGY ,CONFLICT (Psychology) ,PHILOSOPHY of nursing ,THEORY ,RESEARCH funding ,NURSING ethics ,JUDGMENT sampling ,PSYCHOLOGICAL distress ,BIOETHICS - Abstract
Aims and Objectives: To explore moral distress empirically and conceptually, to understand the factors that mitigate and exacerbate moral distress and construct a model that represents how moral distress relates to its constituent parts and related concepts. Background: There is ongoing debate about how to understand and respond to moral distress in nursing practice. Design: The overarching design was feminist empirical bioethics in which feminist interpretive phenomenology provided the tools for data collection and analysis, reported following the COREQ guidelines. Using reflexive balancing, the empirical data were combined with feminist theory to produce normative recommendations about how to respond to moral distress. The Moral Distress Model presented in this paper is a culmination of the empirical data and theory. Methods: Using feminist interpretive phenomenology, critical care nurses in the United Kingdom (n = 21) were interviewed and data analysed. Reflexive Balancing was used to integrate the data with feminist theory to provide normative recommendations about how to understand moral distress. Results: There are five compounding factors that exacerbate/ mitigate nurses' experiences of moral distress: epistemic injustice; the roster lottery; conflict between one's professional and personal responsibilities; ability to advocate and team dynamics. In addition to the causal connection and responses to moral distress, these factors make up the moral distress model which can guide approaches to mitigate moral distress. Conclusions: The Moral Distress Model is the culmination of these data and theorising formulated into a construct to explain how each element interacts. We propose that this model can be used to inform the design of interventions to address moral distress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. ‘Encounters with Experience’: Empirical Bioethics and the Future
- Author
-
Ives, Jonathan
- Published
- 2008
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
8. REASONS TO REDEFINE MORAL DISTRESS: A FEMINIST EMPIRICAL BIOETHICS ANALYSIS.
- Author
-
Morley, Georgina, Bradbury‐Jones, Caroline, and Ives, Jonathan
- Subjects
BIOETHICS ,CONCEPTUAL structures ,PSYCHOLOGICAL distress ,ETHICS ,FEMINISM ,INTENSIVE care nursing ,NURSING ethics ,DATA analysis software ,DESCRIPTIVE statistics - Abstract
There has been increasing debate in recent years about the conceptualization of moral distress. Broadly speaking, two groups of scholars have emerged: those who agree with Jameton's 'narrow definition' that focuses on constraint and those who argue that Jameton's definition is insufficient and needs to be broadened. Using feminist empirical bioethics, we interviewed critical care nurses in the United Kingdom about their experiences and conceptualizations of moral distress. We provide our broader definition of moral distress and examples of data that both challenge and support our conceptualization. We pre‐empt and overcome three key challenges that could be levelled at our account and argue that there are good reasons to adopt our broader definition of moral distress when exploring prevalence of, and management strategies for, moral distress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
9. What is 'moral distress' in nursing? A feminist empirical bioethics study.
- Author
-
Morley, Georgina, Bradbury-Jones, Caroline, and Ives, Jonathan
- Subjects
BIOETHICS ,CONCEPTUAL structures ,CONFLICT (Psychology) ,PSYCHOLOGICAL distress ,ETHICS ,FEMINISM ,INTENSIVE care nursing ,INTERVIEWING ,PHENOMENOLOGY ,NURSES' attitudes ,PHILOSOPHY of nursing ,NURSING ethics ,RESEARCH funding ,UNCERTAINTY ,QUALITATIVE research ,JUDGMENT sampling ,HOSPITAL nursing staff - Abstract
Background: The phenomenon of 'moral distress' has continued to be a popular topic for nursing research. However, much of the scholarship has lacked conceptual clarity, and there is debate about what it means to experience moral distress. Moral distress remains an obscure concept to many clinical nurses, especially those outside of North America, and there is a lack of empirical research regarding its impact on nurses in the United Kingdom and its relevance to clinical practice. Research aim: To explore the concept of moral distress in nursing both empirically and conceptually. Methodology: Feminist interpretive phenomenology was used to explore and analyse the experiences of critical care nurses at two acute care trauma hospitals in the United Kingdom. Empirical data were analysed using Van Manen's six steps for data analysis. Ethical considerations: The study was approved locally by the university ethics review committee and nationally by the Health Research Authority in the United Kingdom. Findings: The empirical findings suggest that psychological distress can occur in response to a variety of moral events. The moral events identified as causing psychological distress in the participants' narratives were moral tension, moral uncertainty, moral constraint, moral conflict and moral dilemmas. Discussion: We suggest a new definition of moral distress which captures this broader range of moral events as legitimate causes of distress. We also suggest that moral distress can be sub-categroised according to the source of distress, for example, 'moral-uncertainty distress'. We argue that this could aid in the development of interventions which attempt to address and mitigate moral distress. Conclusion: The empirical findings support the notion that narrow conceptions of moral distress fail to capture the real-life experiences of this group of critical care nurses. If these experiences resonate with other nurses and healthcare professionals, then it is likely that the definition needs to be broadened to recognise these experiences as 'moral distress'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
10. A systematic review of empirical bioethics methodologies.
- Author
-
Davies, Rachel, Ives, Jonathan, and Dunn, Michael
- Subjects
BIOETHICS ,MEDICAL ethics ,PROFESSIONAL ethics of physicians ,META-analysis ,GENETIC engineering - Abstract
Background: Despite the increased prevalence of bioethics research that seeks to use empirical data to answer normative research questions, there is no consensus as to what an appropriate methodology for this would be. This review aims to search the literature, present and critically discuss published Empirical Bioethics methodologies. Methods: MedLine, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched between 15/02/12 and 16/06/13 to find relevant papers. These were abstract reviewed independently by two reviewers with papers meeting the inclusion criteria subjected to data extraction. Results: 33 publications (32 papers and one book chapter) were included which contained 32 distinct methodologies. The majority of these methodologies (n = 22) can be classed as either dialogical or consultative, and these represent two extreme 'poles' of methodological orientation. Consideration of these results provoked three central questions that are central to the planning of an empirical bioethics study, and revolve around how a normative conclusion can be justified, the analytic process through which that conclusion is reached, and the kind of conclusion that is sought. Conclusion: When considering which methodology or research methods to adopt in any particular study, researchers need to think carefully about the nature of the claims they wish to generate through their analyses, and how these claims align with the aims of the research. Whilst there are superficial similarities in the ways that identical research methods are made use of, the different meta-ethical and epistemological commitments that undergird the range of methodological approaches adopted rehearse many of the central foundational disagreements that play out within moral philosophy and bioethical analysis more broadly. There is little common ground that transcends these disagreements, and we argue that this is likely to present a challenge for the legitimacy of the bioethical enterprise. We conclude, however, that this heterogeneity ought to be welcomed, but urge those involved in the field to engage meaningfully and explicitly with questions concerning what kinds of moral claim they want to be able to make, about normative justification and the methodological process, and about the coherence of these components within their work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2015
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
11. A method of Reflexive Balancing in a Pragmatic, Interdisciplinary and Reflexive Bioethics.
- Author
-
Ives, Jonathan
- Subjects
- *
EMPIRICISM , *MEDICAL ethics , *PHILOSOPHY of medicine , *RESEARCH ethics , *EMPIRICAL research - Abstract
In recent years there has been a wealth of literature arguing the need for empirical and interdisciplinary approaches to bioethics, based on the premise that an empirically informed ethical analysis is more grounded, contextually sensitive and therefore more relevant to clinical practice than an 'abstract' philosophical analysis. Bioethics has (arguably) always been an interdisciplinary field, and the rise of 'empirical' (bio)ethics need not be seen as an attempt to give a new name to the longstanding practice of interdisciplinary collaboration, but can perhaps best be understood as a substantive attempt to engage with the nature of that interdisciplinarity and to articulate the relationship between the many different disciplines (some of them empirical) that contribute to the field. It can also be described as an endeavour to explain how different disciplinary approaches can be integrated to effectively answer normative questions in bioethics, and fundamental to that endeavour is the need to think about how a robust methodology can be articulated that successfully marries apparently divergent epistemological and metaethical perspectives with method. This paper proposes ' Reflexive Bioethics' ( RB) as a methodology for interdisciplinary and empirical bioethics, which utilizes a method of ' Reflexive Balancing' ( RBL). RBL has been developed in response to criticisms of various forms of reflective equilibrium, and is built upon a pragmatic characterization of Bioethics and a 'quasi-moral foundationalism', which allows RBL to avoid some of the difficulties associated with RE and yet retain the flexible egalitarianism that makes it intuitively appealing to many. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2014
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
12. WHO'S ARGUING? A CALL FOR REFLEXIVITY IN BIOETHICS.
- Author
-
IVES, JONATHAN and DUNN, MICHAEL
- Subjects
- *
BIOETHICS , *REFLEXIVITY , *PHILOSOPHY , *CONFLICT of interests , *SCIENCE & ethics - Abstract
In this paper we set forth what we believe to be a relatively controversial argument, claiming that ‘bioethics’ needs to undergo a fundamental change in the way it is practised. This change, we argue, requires philosophical bioethicists to adopt reflexive practices when applying their analyses in public forums, acknowledging openly that bioethics is an embedded socio-cultural practice, shaped by the ever-changing intuitions of individual philosophers, which cannot be viewed as a detached intellectual endeavour. This said, we argue that in order to manage the personal, social and cultural embeddedness of bioethics, philosophical bioethicists should openly acknowledge how their practices are constructed and should, in their writing, explicitly deal with issues of bias and conflict of interest, just as empirical scientists are required to do. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2010
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
13. APPROPRIATE METHODOLOGIES FOR EMPIRICAL BIOETHICS: IT'S ALL RELATIVE.
- Author
-
IVES, JONATHAN and DRAPER, HEATHER
- Subjects
- *
BIOETHICS , *PHILOSOPHY of science , *SCIENCE & ethics , *BIOLOGY -- Social aspects , *RESEARCH methodology , *PATERNALISM - Abstract
In this article we distinguish between philosophical bioethics (PB), descriptive policy orientated bioethics (DPOB) and normative policy oriented bioethics (NPOB). We argue that finding an appropriate methodology for combining empirical data and moral theory depends on what the aims of the research endeavour are, and that, for the most part, this combination is only required for NPOB. After briefly discussing the debate around the is/ought problem, and suggesting that both sides of this debate are misunderstanding one another (i.e. one side treats it as a conceptual problem, whilst the other treats it as an empirical claim), we outline and defend a methodological approach to NPOB based on work we have carried out on a project exploring the normative foundations of paternal rights and responsibilities. We suggest that given the prominent role already played by moral intuition in moral theory, one appropriate way to integrate empirical data and philosophical bioethics is to utilize empirically gathered lay intuition as the foundation for ethical reasoning in NPOB. The method we propose involves a modification of a long-established tradition on non-intervention in qualitative data gathering, combined with a form of reflective equilibrium where the demands of theory and data are given equal weight and a pragmatic compromise reached. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2009
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
14. AN EMPIRICAL APPROACH TO BIOETHICS: SOCIAL SCIENCE 'OF', 'FOR' AND 'IN' BIOETHICS RESEARCH.
- Author
-
Draper, Heather and Ives, Jonathan
- Subjects
- *
BIOETHICS , *SOCIAL sciences , *METHODOLOGY , *SOCIOLOGY - Abstract
In 1997, the Wellcome Trust Biomedical Ethics programme was launched in the UK, with a strategy that sought to encourage bioethics research that married normative philosophical bioethics and social science methodologies. This paper explores a few of the children of this marriage, particularly those approaches that have been taken in an attempt to make this interdisciplinary marriage a happy one. We suggest that the dominant discourse has involved social science for bioethics, and sociology of bioethics, and we suggest further that neither of these approaches represent a happy and equal marriage. We then outline a third approach: social science in bioethics. Drawing upon our experiences of conducting such a project we describe the broad methodological approach that we have taken, and outline how, and why, this approach might be productive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2007
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.