The French medical context is characterized by institutionalization of the ethical reflection in health care facilities and an important disparity between spaces of ethical reflection. In theory, the healthcare professional may mobilise an arsenal of resources to help him in his ethical reflection. But what happens in practice? We conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 health-care professionals who did and did not have recourse to clinical ethical committees. We also implemented two focus groups with 18 professionals involved in various spaces of ethical reflection in order to let them debate about a better way to organize ethical reflection in their institutional contexts. The qualitative analysis allows to us to underline the coexistence of different conceptions of ethics among health care professionals. We also observed that the participants in our study shared the experience of ethically problematic situations as roadblocks in the process of communication and decision-making. We therefore report the factors which favour or inhibit the ethical course leading to the resolution or at the very least soothing of the situation at hand. Finally, we discuss methodological issues and underline the fact that while the patient is at the heart of the professional's ethical preoccupations, this does not imply that they are actors in decisions that concern them.
We present a case study of uneven participation in a focus group discussion with health care professionals involved in local ethical committees. We conclude that the status of the different participants did not give adequate space for full participation of the members involved. Two commentators were invited to comment on the case study to enable further reflection on the methodology used for the target group. The first reviewer investigated whether research should address power relations and hierarchies of knowledge encountered in the study process. She also discussed whether researchers should be held ethically and politically responsible for the consequences of producing relations and hierarchies. The second reviewer looked at what focus groups say about professional practices in hospitals, what participants are willing (or unwilling) to invest, and what are the conditions for setting up ethical reflection.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.