When Religious Language Blocks Discussion About Health Care Decision Making. View Full Text


Ontology type: schema:ScholarlyArticle     


Article Info

DATE

2019-04-05

AUTHORS

George Khushf

ABSTRACT

There is a curious asymmetry in cases where the use of religious language involves a breakdown in communication and leads to a seemingly intractable dispute. Why does the use of religious language in such cases almost always arise on the side of patients and their families, rather than on the side of clinicians or others who work in healthcare settings? I suggest that the intractable disputes arise when patients and their families use religious language to frame their problem and the possibilities of solution. Unlike clinicians, they are not bilingual and thus lack the capacity to understand and negotiate differences in terms that are responsive to those who work in healthcare settings. After considering a representative case, I explore whether an ethics consultant or chaplain can function as a translator and suggest that, at best, such efforts at mediation depend on contingent aspects of a case and will only be partially successful. To appreciate limits on the role for bilingual translators, I consider a futility dispute where a parent using religious language demands that everything be done for a permanently unconscious child. I challenge the traditional interpretation that says the parent values "mere duration of biological life irrespective of quality." From a religious perspective, human life is never "merely biological." This effort to slot the dispute into standard philosophical schemas misses what is crucial in the dispute. I suggest that a better interpretation views the dispute at a meta-level as one about whether withholding and withdrawing care is morally distinguishable from killing. Curiously, this interpretation makes the advocate of futile care into an ally of those "quality of life" advocates who also challenge this distinction. The crux of their dispute now rests on the normative ethics of killing. While I think my interpretation comes much closer to the views of many who demand 'futile care,' I suggest that it still falls short because of the way it reconstructs the religious concerns in nonreligious terms. I close by considering an analogy between the language of suffering and the language of faith, suggesting that both require a much richer understanding of the narratives that orient the lives of patients and their families. More... »

Journal

TITLE

HEC Forum

ISSUE

N/A

VOLUME

N/A

Author Affiliations

Identifiers

URI

http://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x

DIMENSIONS

https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1113261843

PUBMED

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30953249


Indexing Status Check whether this publication has been indexed by Scopus and Web Of Science using the SN Indexing Status Tool
Incoming Citations Browse incoming citations for this publication using opencitations.net

JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.

TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT

[
  {
    "@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json", 
    "about": [
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/2203", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Philosophy", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/22", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Philosophy and Religious Studies", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }
    ], 
    "author": [
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "University of South Carolina", 
          "id": "https://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.254567.7", 
          "name": [
            "Department of Philosophy and Center for Bioethics, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA. khushf@sc.edu."
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Khushf", 
        "givenName": "George", 
        "type": "Person"
      }
    ], 
    "citation": [
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.2307/3563319", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1027710501"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm/144.3_pt_1.726", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1031854182"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1082442993", 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }
    ], 
    "datePublished": "2019-04-05", 
    "datePublishedReg": "2019-04-05", 
    "description": "There is a curious asymmetry in cases where the use of religious language involves a breakdown in communication and leads to a seemingly intractable dispute. Why does the use of religious language in such cases almost always arise on the side of patients and their families, rather than on the side of clinicians or others who work in healthcare settings? I suggest that the intractable disputes arise when patients and their families use religious language to frame their problem and the possibilities of solution. Unlike clinicians, they are not bilingual and thus lack the capacity to understand and negotiate differences in terms that are responsive to those who work in healthcare settings. After considering a representative case, I explore whether an ethics consultant or chaplain can function as a translator and suggest that, at best, such efforts at mediation depend on contingent aspects of a case and will only be partially successful. To appreciate limits on the role for bilingual translators, I consider a futility dispute where a parent using religious language demands that everything be done for a permanently unconscious child. I challenge the traditional interpretation that says the parent values \"mere duration of biological life irrespective of quality.\" From a religious perspective, human life is never \"merely biological.\" This effort to slot the dispute into standard philosophical schemas misses what is crucial in the dispute. I suggest that a better interpretation views the dispute at a meta-level as one about whether withholding and withdrawing care is morally distinguishable from killing. Curiously, this interpretation makes the advocate of futile care into an ally of those \"quality of life\" advocates who also challenge this distinction. The crux of their dispute now rests on the normative ethics of killing. While I think my interpretation comes much closer to the views of many who demand 'futile care,' I suggest that it still falls short because of the way it reconstructs the religious concerns in nonreligious terms. I close by considering an analogy between the language of suffering and the language of faith, suggesting that both require a much richer understanding of the narratives that orient the lives of patients and their families.", 
    "genre": "research_article", 
    "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x", 
    "inLanguage": [
      "en"
    ], 
    "isAccessibleForFree": false, 
    "isPartOf": [
      {
        "id": "sg:journal.1099908", 
        "issn": [
          "0956-2737", 
          "1572-8498"
        ], 
        "name": "HEC Forum", 
        "type": "Periodical"
      }
    ], 
    "name": "When Religious Language Blocks Discussion About Health Care Decision Making.", 
    "productId": [
      {
        "name": "pubmed_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "30953249"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "nlm_unique_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "8917455"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "doi", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "dimensions_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "pub.1113261843"
        ]
      }
    ], 
    "sameAs": [
      "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x", 
      "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1113261843"
    ], 
    "sdDataset": "articles", 
    "sdDatePublished": "2019-04-11T14:21", 
    "sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/", 
    "sdPublisher": {
      "name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project", 
      "type": "Organization"
    }, 
    "sdSource": "s3://com-uberresearch-data-dimensions-target-20181106-alternative/cleanup/v134/2549eaecd7973599484d7c17b260dba0a4ecb94b/merge/v9/a6c9fde33151104705d4d7ff012ea9563521a3ce/jats-lookup/v90/0000000372_0000000372/records_117128_00000003.jsonl", 
    "type": "ScholarlyArticle", 
    "url": "http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x"
  }
]
 

Download the RDF metadata as:  json-ld nt turtle xml License info

HOW TO GET THIS DATA PROGRAMMATICALLY:

JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.

curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x'

N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.

curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x'

Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.

curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x'

RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.

curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x'


 

This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.

65 TRIPLES      20 PREDICATES      27 URIs      16 LITERALS      6 BLANK NODES

Subject Predicate Object
1 sg:pub.10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x schema:about anzsrc-for:22
2 anzsrc-for:2203
3 schema:author N90c5aaaa4ab849959f589ef1a345f7db
4 schema:citation https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1082442993
5 https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm/144.3_pt_1.726
6 https://doi.org/10.2307/3563319
7 schema:datePublished 2019-04-05
8 schema:datePublishedReg 2019-04-05
9 schema:description There is a curious asymmetry in cases where the use of religious language involves a breakdown in communication and leads to a seemingly intractable dispute. Why does the use of religious language in such cases almost always arise on the side of patients and their families, rather than on the side of clinicians or others who work in healthcare settings? I suggest that the intractable disputes arise when patients and their families use religious language to frame their problem and the possibilities of solution. Unlike clinicians, they are not bilingual and thus lack the capacity to understand and negotiate differences in terms that are responsive to those who work in healthcare settings. After considering a representative case, I explore whether an ethics consultant or chaplain can function as a translator and suggest that, at best, such efforts at mediation depend on contingent aspects of a case and will only be partially successful. To appreciate limits on the role for bilingual translators, I consider a futility dispute where a parent using religious language demands that everything be done for a permanently unconscious child. I challenge the traditional interpretation that says the parent values "mere duration of biological life irrespective of quality." From a religious perspective, human life is never "merely biological." This effort to slot the dispute into standard philosophical schemas misses what is crucial in the dispute. I suggest that a better interpretation views the dispute at a meta-level as one about whether withholding and withdrawing care is morally distinguishable from killing. Curiously, this interpretation makes the advocate of futile care into an ally of those "quality of life" advocates who also challenge this distinction. The crux of their dispute now rests on the normative ethics of killing. While I think my interpretation comes much closer to the views of many who demand 'futile care,' I suggest that it still falls short because of the way it reconstructs the religious concerns in nonreligious terms. I close by considering an analogy between the language of suffering and the language of faith, suggesting that both require a much richer understanding of the narratives that orient the lives of patients and their families.
10 schema:genre research_article
11 schema:inLanguage en
12 schema:isAccessibleForFree false
13 schema:isPartOf sg:journal.1099908
14 schema:name When Religious Language Blocks Discussion About Health Care Decision Making.
15 schema:productId N5079c1f52ba84865ab6127b39c21bd06
16 N5f3743adfe5847f7b25634291b05141e
17 N90ebd290cd51439bb30eb7e175efd182
18 Ne725ace63e4442068c801a4bb2725190
19 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1113261843
20 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x
21 schema:sdDatePublished 2019-04-11T14:21
22 schema:sdLicense https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/
23 schema:sdPublisher Na2cf84f8d3e34169b7e199988883929b
24 schema:url http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x
25 sgo:license sg:explorer/license/
26 sgo:sdDataset articles
27 rdf:type schema:ScholarlyArticle
28 N0199b899c6f04f83a7ce2921bb1d3968 schema:affiliation https://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.254567.7
29 schema:familyName Khushf
30 schema:givenName George
31 rdf:type schema:Person
32 N5079c1f52ba84865ab6127b39c21bd06 schema:name pubmed_id
33 schema:value 30953249
34 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
35 N5f3743adfe5847f7b25634291b05141e schema:name dimensions_id
36 schema:value pub.1113261843
37 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
38 N90c5aaaa4ab849959f589ef1a345f7db rdf:first N0199b899c6f04f83a7ce2921bb1d3968
39 rdf:rest rdf:nil
40 N90ebd290cd51439bb30eb7e175efd182 schema:name doi
41 schema:value 10.1007/s10730-019-09371-x
42 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
43 Na2cf84f8d3e34169b7e199988883929b schema:name Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project
44 rdf:type schema:Organization
45 Ne725ace63e4442068c801a4bb2725190 schema:name nlm_unique_id
46 schema:value 8917455
47 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
48 anzsrc-for:22 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
49 schema:name Philosophy and Religious Studies
50 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
51 anzsrc-for:2203 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
52 schema:name Philosophy
53 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
54 sg:journal.1099908 schema:issn 0956-2737
55 1572-8498
56 schema:name HEC Forum
57 rdf:type schema:Periodical
58 https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1082442993 schema:CreativeWork
59 https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm/144.3_pt_1.726 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1031854182
60 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
61 https://doi.org/10.2307/3563319 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1027710501
62 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
63 https://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.254567.7 schema:alternateName University of South Carolina
64 schema:name Department of Philosophy and Center for Bioethics, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA. khushf@sc.edu.
65 rdf:type schema:Organization
 




Preview window. Press ESC to close (or click here)


...