A survey of New Jersey hospital ethics committees

Abstract

A mail survey in 1988 of all 108 hospitals in New Jersey, and telephone follow-up in 1990, investigated the extent and structure of ethics committees with attention to the distinctions between prognosis, infant care review committees (ICRC) and general ethics committees (HECs). It disclosed that as of August, 1990, 74 hospitals had prognosis committees, 16 had ICRCs, and 64 had HECs. All types of committees tend to cluster in teaching hospitals and in hospitals with 200-500 beds. HECs average 13 members which include 4-5 physicians, 2-3 nurses, administrators and clergy (1-2 each), and fewer than one each for any other single profession. The primary purpose of HECS is to develop hospital ethics policy (96%), followed by educating hospital staff (80%), and providing counsel and support to physicians (67%). Case review with recommendation is provided by 54% of the HECs and 21% are involved in confirmation of prognosis.

Membership recruitment and training in health care ethics committees: Results from a national pilot survey

“…The earliest literature and studies related to HCECs explored broad questions regarding the design and purpose of the committees (d’Oronzio, Dunn, and Gregory 1991; Hoffman 1993; Teel 1975; Youngner et al 1983) and patient perceptions of them (Youngner et al 1984). As the number of HCECs expanded and their importance within health care systems increased, focus began to shift away from the committees as a whole to examine how committees handled clinical ethics consultations specifically (DuVal et al 2004; Fox, Myers, and Pearlman 2007; McGee et al 2002) and the professional education and competency of those committee members engaged in ethics consultations (American Society of Bioethics and Humanities [ASBH] 1998; Hoffmann, Tarzian, and O’Neil 2000).…”

The quality of bioethics debate: implications for clinical ethics committees

“…The same studies have also found relatively low levels of ethics training among members with a different subject specialism 4 24 – 26. Furthermore, Benatar’s concerns about the short training programmes that litter the field of bioethics are also relevant within clinical ethics 1.…”

Empirical assessments of clinical ethics services: implications for clinical ethics committees

“…Ethics training will also facilitate the practical ethical skills required by their decision-making, policy formation and educational responsibilities. Given this requirement it is of concern that studies in the USA and the UK reveal that ethics specialists form a small percentage of members of CECs 30-33. It is unrealistic to assume that the training required can be provided, as is currently the case, over a weekend or during an ‘intensive’ week-long course 34.…”

“…Given this requirement it is of concern that studies in the USA and the UK reveal that ethics specialists form a small percentage of members of CECs. [30][31][32][33] It is unrealistic to assume that the training required can be provided, as is currently the case, over a weekend or during an 'intensive' week-long course. 34 However, unless precondition 1 is fulfilled it is unlikely that efforts will be made to establish sufficient training programmes.…”