Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11851/11824
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBuruk, B.-
dc.contributor.authorYildiz, A.-
dc.contributor.authorGürcan, G.-
dc.contributor.authorÖzüçetin, B.-
dc.contributor.authorŞekerlisoy, M.B.-
dc.contributor.authorYoldaş, S.-
dc.contributor.authorKale, E.-
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-10T15:47:49Z-
dc.date.available2024-10-10T15:47:49Z-
dc.date.issued2024-
dc.identifier.isbn978-303156211-2-
dc.identifier.isbn978-303156210-5-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56211-2_6-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11851/11824-
dc.description.abstractThis chapter consists of 30 clinical cases that delve into the intricate realm of ethical quandaries experienced by psychiatrists in the course of their authentic engagements with patients. The chapter involves a systematic approach to each case, beginning with a comprehensive summary that lays the groundwork for subsequent ethical examinations. Upon presenting the case summaries, the ethical predicaments inherent to the specific content are identified. To further unravel the complexities, an ethical analysis method tailored to each case's unique challenges is employed. While some cases warranted the application of a singular ethical analysis method, others demanded a more nuanced exploration, prompting the comparison of multiple ethical frameworks within the confines of the same case. The ethical analysis encompasses a diversity of approaches, including the application of principle-based analysis, virtue ethics, and deontological reasoning. Additionally, guidance provided by esteemed ethical protocols, incorporating insights from ethical guides such as the WMA Declaration of Helsinki, the WMA Declaration of Lisbon, and the Council of Europe's Oviedo Convention, is harvested in the process. This multifaceted approach allowed us to conduct a thorough and nuanced exploration of each case, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the ethical landscape within psychiatrists' professional interactions. The juxtaposition of various ethical analysis methods not only enriched the depth of our examination but also provided a nuanced perspective that acknowledged the complexity inherent in ethical decision-making within the field of psychiatry. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringer International Publishingen_US
dc.relation.ispartofEthical Dilemma in Psychiatry: Real Cases Scenarioen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.titleCase Discussionsen_US
dc.typeBook Parten_US
dc.departmentTOBB ETÜen_US
dc.identifier.startpage81en_US
dc.identifier.endpage146en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85204842957en_US
dc.institutionauthor-
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/978-3-031-56211-2_6-
dc.authorscopusid57216357055-
dc.authorscopusid57286620100-
dc.authorscopusid56589975300-
dc.authorscopusid59341641000-
dc.authorscopusid59341700700-
dc.authorscopusid59341681700-
dc.authorscopusid59341717800-
dc.relation.publicationcategoryKitap Bölümü - Uluslararasıen_US
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairetypeBook Part-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.languageiso639-1en-
Appears in Collections:Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / Scopus Indexed Publications Collection
Show simple item record



CORE Recommender

Google ScholarTM

Check




Altmetric


Items in GCRIS Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.