| 摘要: | 中文論文提要
一個良好的醫療倫理決策模式之所以能被廣泛地應用於臨床實務，以解決日趨複雜的倫理問題，主要是因為其預設的道德根源、人際關係、應用的概念與原則，是能夠切合醫療決策的情況和需求。因此，本文從道德根源、人際關係、應用的概念與原則三方面來分析一個醫療決策的內容，見出其特色。道德根源是一個決策模式之基石，此基石不但說明道德的意義，同時內含相應的人際關係，而基石之分流即是應用的概念與原則。換言之，道德根源是基本的原理，而應用的概念與原則則是將此原理之要義轉化成臨床實際可行之步驟，故三者環環相扣，關係密不可分。將上述三點對任何一個醫療倫理決策模式做分析，即可得知被分析模式之優缺點。
以當前西方臨床上由莊遜所建立的主流的醫療倫理決策模式為例，其道德根源是原則主義之共同道德性，應用的主要概念是:仁愛、不傷害、尊重自律與公義等四個原則。這些原則實預設了西方之個人自由主義。在此背景下，故莊遜的模式以病人之自律為優先。它所預設的人際關係乃是「公民式」的契約關係。醫療決策僅侷限醫師與病人，家屬的參與可有可無。病人的自主權利提高了，但在某些狀況下，將醫療決策權交於因病使判斷力下降的病人是危險的，病人不願透露自己的選取和價值，也易產生棘手的道德兩難議題；而儒家的家庭參與和家庭自律，正能補足莊遜模式之弱點。再者，莊遜公民式的醫病關係顯得很薄弱且未論述應該如何對病人進行關懷以增加醫病間之信任感。儒家自是有家庭的參與，解除病人的孤立無援的困境。而諾丁的關懷倫理學對關懷者與被關懷者間該如何互動有詳細論述，正可適用於臨床實務。
以諾丁的道德根源論點，人與人間之關懷才是道德的基礎，其相應的是關懷式的醫病關係，再延伸出諾丁的醫療倫理決策模式。而儒家義理是以不忍人之心作為道德之根源，關注家庭之人倫關係，現今儒家社群仍舊深受其影響，乃至生
II
活方式與行為，仍隱含著儒家舊有之思想；此在以儒家義理為基礎的社會，常有近乎儒家之醫療倫理決策模式出現。
本文以道德根源、人際關係、應用的概念與原則，分析莊遜、諾丁、儒家之醫療倫理決策模式，再經分析與消融後，截取各家之優點，最後建構「儒家社群之醫療倫理決策模式」，這是一個根據人際間具有的同情共感，建立具有普遍意義的醫療決策模式。其道德根源是儒家之不忍人之心，而此心可以包含諾丁的關懷與莊遜之共同的道德性之要義。不忍人之心是人人皆內在所固有的，是良知良能，較切合我們的道德經驗，由具體的人際關係做開展，較貼切我們的感受與道德判斷，因而人際關係應把家屬納入，因病人體弱，判斷力亦下降，有家屬在旁參與醫療倫理的決策，對病人而言是另一種保護；對諾丁而言，家人位於關懷圈之最內圈，所施予的關懷應比他人來得更多，故諾丁亦會贊成「家庭的自律」。而應用的概念與原則則是會通莊遜、諾丁、儒家之理據後所形成，去除單一理論之缺點，而融合三種理論之優勢，期使此模式對醫療照護品質能提升，同時用傳統儒家之觀點，以迥異西方之角度，重新去審視人的定位，生活與生命之價值與意義，亦能引導臨床醫護人員面對倫理困境時，能順利地進行推理，使得最終的決定是符合倫理的解答。
Abstract
A good medical ethical decision-making model can be widely used on clinical practices to solve increasingly complex ethical issues because the sources of morality, interpersonal relationship, and the moral concepts and principles applied are presupposed to be able to accommodate the conditions and requirements of a medical situation. In this thesis, I employ these three aspects in the analysis of a medical decision model to show its special features. The sources of morality is the foundation of a medical decision model and this foundation explains not only the meaning of morality, but also implies the kind of personal interaction and the moral concepts and principles are derived from this source. In other words, the source of morality is the fundamental principle, and the moral concepts and principles are applied to clinical practice. The three aspects are so interrelated and inseparable and through their analysis we could grasp the advantages and disadvantages of a model. Taking the current western mainstream medical ethical decision-making model created by Albert R. Jonsen as an example, we could see that its source of morality is the “common morality” of principlism. Its main concepts are the four principles, i.e. the principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, respect of autonomy and justice. These principles of principlism presuppose the liberal individualism of the west. Under this background, Jonsen’s model takes priority the principle of respect of personal autonomy. Personal relation is the typical citizen contractual relationship. Persons involved in medical decision making are limited to doctors and patients while familial participation could be scraped. The self-determination of patients is enhanced. However, under certain conditions, it is risky to leave medical decision making to the patient whose power of judgment is inflicted by the disease. Patient sometimes does not wish to disclose his or her choice and value judgments, and it easily leads to
II
tough ethical dilemmas. Confucian conception of family participation and family autonomy could supplement the shortcomings of Jonsen’s model. Furthermore, Jonsen’s citizen contractual physician-patient relationship is too loose and his model does not respond to the loss of trust between doctors and patients. Confucianism provides family participation to relieve the patient's lonely helpless predicament. While Noddings care ethics has detailed how to improve interactions between the caring and the cared, some of the elements could be applied in clinical practice.
For Noddings, care between persons is the source and foundation of morality. In medical situation, caring is the basic physician-patient relationship, and from this we could derive Noddings’ medical decision model. Confucianism takes the mind of empathy as the source of morality and emphasizes human ethical familial relation. Presently, Confucian communities are still deeply affected by this philosophy, and their life style and behaviors still embody these old Confucian thoughts. Therefore, in a society that takes Confucianism as the basis, it always shows certain Confucian elements in its medical decision model.
The paper employs the framework of moral sources, personal relation, and moral concepts and principles in the analysis of the medical ethical decision models of Jonsen, Noddings and Confucianism and after some detailed analysis, it tries to construct a Confucian community medical ethical decision model. It is a medical decision model built upon interpersonal empathy with universal significance. In this new model, we take the Confucian moral empathy as the source of morality which could contain Noddings’ caring and the common morality of Jonsen’s model. The mind of empathy is an inherent and intrinsic feature of every person. It is our inherent conscience and moral capability, and it fits closely with our moral experiences and judgments. As the patient is usually weak and dependent, the capacity for judgment naturally decreased, hence family participation in medical ethical decision is
III
legitimate and a kind of protection for the patient. According to Noddings’ care ethics, family members are in the innermost circle of caring and would provide much more care than others. Hence, Noddings may also approve Confucian family autonomy. In this model, we absorb the concepts and principles of Jonsen, Noddings and Confucian theories into a well-founded model. It tries to remove the shortcomings of each single theory and merges the advantages of three theories in order to improve the quality of medical care. Furthermore, it employs the Confucian point of view and reconstruct the situations of human being, the meaning and value of life. It constitutes a different model and could provide a workable model for medical professionals to solve probable moral dilemmas, so as to arrive at the best ethical solution for the medical professionals, the patient and the family. |
