Litchfield, M. (1994). Viewpoint: Telling nursing stories. Kai Tiaki: Nursing New Zealand, 2(4), 28.
Abstract: A brief critique and comment on the ethical implications of nurse researchers using methodology that involves soliciting personal experiences of patients and subsequently publishing them as stories.
|
|
Carr, J. (2000). Ensuring consent is informed. Kai Tiaki: Nursing New Zealand, 6(7), 22–23.
Abstract: The author examines the concept of informed consent as it applies to patients and as it is obtained by nurses. The principles of autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence are discussed. How these principles inform critical care nursing is explored and five inappropriate uses of technology in resuscitation are used as examples.
|
|
Paterson, M. (2000). Dealing with life and death decisions. Kai Tiaki: Nursing New Zealand, 6(7), 14–16.
Abstract: This article examines the implications for nurses of not-for-resuscitation orders and orders to withdraw treatment. The rights of patients and correct procedure in the case of not-for-resuscitation or do-not-resuscitate orders are considered, as well as the ethical dilemma facing nurses in cases of the withdrawal of treatment. Guidelines are offered to assist nurses in reaching an ethical decision to withdraw treatment. Euthanasia is defined and case law decisions on not-for-resuscitation and treatment withdrawal are cited.
|
|
Muir-Cochrane, E., Holmes, C., & Walton, J. A. (2002). Law and policy in relation to the use of seclusion in psychiatric hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Contemporary Nurse, 13(2/3), 136–145.
Abstract: This paper discusses legal issues associated with the seclusion of acutely disturbed patients in psychiatric hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. There continues to be great variation in opinion and operational definition as to whether seclusion is a medical treatment, nursing intervention and management tool, or merely a form of situational restraint. Reflecting this lack of clarity, mental health acts and policies concerning the regulation and practice of seclusion lack consistency and focus across geographical boundaries and jurisdictions. Australian and New Zealand legislation and institutional policy is discussed in order to shed light on the contemporary issues highlighted by this controversial nursing practice. The authors note that mental health professionals must continue to review the practice of seclusion and to actively promote the use of acceptable alternatives. In addition nurses and other mental health professionals have a responsibility to understand current legislation and policy frameworks and to influence change where this is necessary to ensure the best practice possible in their clinical area.
|
|
Farrow, T., McKenna, B., & O'Brien, A. J. (2002). Initiating committal proceedings 'just in case' with voluntary patients: A critique of nursing practice. Nursing Praxis in New Zealand, 18(2), 15–23.
Abstract: The authors report a clinical audit that, combined with anecdotal evidence, verifies the practice of putting section 8B medical certificates on the files of voluntary mental health patients at the time of admission. This is seen as a strategy to balance the requirement to support and promote the autonomy of voluntary patients with the need to protect those patients or other people. A conceptual analysis of these issues indicates that such a practice is both legally questionable and ethically inappropriate. The authors suggest an alternative framework for practice that is legally and ethically preferable for both nurses and patients.
|
|