Daryl Pullman’s (2023) article purports to show that the increase and relatively high number of assisted deaths in Canada argues against the Canadian approach to medical aid in dying (MAiD)—similar...

The decision to involuntary hospitalize a patient underlines an inherent contradiction in psychiatry between the need for care and the lack of consent to care. The growing importance of respect for...

In France, the practice of clinical ethics, and more specifically of clinical ethics consultation (CEC), is marked both by a heritage of practices from across the Atlantic and by a desire to adapt to the needs of the national context, which is increasingly giving a voice to patients. While the practice remained marginal in France for a long time, a number of structures developed in the wake of the Covid-19 health crisis. The aim of this article is to take an (...) initial national look at the practice of CEC in France, from its origins to its prospects. An exploratory questionnaire was drawn up by 5 teams offering CEC and linked by a historic partnership. It consisted of 4 parts: presentation of the structure, form taken by the CEC, whether or not they agreed with the fundamental proposals, and whether or not they wanted to form a national CEC collective. The results cover 38 organizations, 26 of which say they practice CEC. Although the practices of these 26 organizations varied, they all agreed on the objective of offering case-by-case medical decision support, with the majority adhering to the basic principles identified and wishing to participate in a CEC collective. This initial exploration provides an opportunity to put the practice of CEC in France into perspective in the international context and opens up prospects for collective work on the practical and methodological fundamentals, both by drawing on the similarities and the differences between different countries. (shrink)

The implementation of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) as a new tool for prevention against HIV raised particular ethical concerns regarding the individuals’ and the collective's best interests in France. It was questioned whether the beneficence of taking or prescribing PrEP regarding its high efficacy to protect people from HIV is always more important than the maleficence represented by the risks involved, such as healthy people taking a pill with side effects, the growth of sexually transmitted infections or the potential generalization of (...) risk-taking sexual behaviour. The main objective of this study was to explore patients’ and health professionals’ ethical questioning on PrEP. Sixty-nine qualitative interviews were conducted with 45 users and 24 healthcare professionals. Overall, this study shows that those primarily concerned by PrEP tend to dismiss ethical questions regarding PrEP itself in the name of its efficacy and the empowerment it allows, but they would rather stress the impact PrEP can have on individuals’ sexual behaviour and how it can affect their autonomy if it is prescribed blindly without taking into consideration the specific living context and life history of each PrEP user. (shrink)