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

Abstract

This pilot study reports on a survey regarding recruitment, appointment, and training of members for health care ethics committees (HCECs). Background Past studies have examined HCECs, but have focused on the roles of the committees and the broad makeup of membership. Thus, our study fills an important knowledge gap in trends of membership recruitment and appointment processes employed by HCECs to comprise their membership. Methods We posted our survey on several bioethics listservs between June and August 2015. Of the 103 respondents that started the survey, 59 were eligible for inclusion based on our criteria. We analyzed survey results descriptively and qualitatively. Results Overall we found no unifying standards of recruitment or appointment across the 59 respondents. Additionally, while responding committees varied in the professional backgrounds and attributes they valued in potential members, we found that most respondents valued traits of the applicants over specific knowledge or skills. Conclusions This study provides a first look into how HCECs recruit members. Future research is needed to better understand the complexities of the issues discovered during this study, given that the HCEC members appointed are the individuals who fulfill committee obligations.

Hospital Ethics Committees in accredited hospitals in Poland—availability of information

“…Among the institutions that revealed the committee's composition, the most frequent members were medical professionals (physicians, nurses) and psychologists. Similar results were obtained by Czarkowski et al, which showed that the composition of bioethics committees, apart from physicians, included nurses 86%, psychologists 28% (Czarkowski et al 2015), and according to the research of Prince et al (study reports on a survey regarding recruitment, appointment, and training of members for health care ethics committees at US) -nurses were members of 98% ethics committee members (Prince et al 2017). The research revealed that representatives of the clergy were members of only 14.3% of the commission, while according to data obtained by Czarkowski et al representatives of the clergy were members of as many as 42% (Czarkowski et al 2015).…”

“…The research revealed that representatives of the clergy were members of only 14.3% of the commission, while according to data obtained by Czarkowski et al representatives of the clergy were members of as many as 42% (Czarkowski et al 2015). According to research from other countries clergy representatives were members of almost all committees at US (98%) (Prince et al 2017), or a vast majority at UK (84%) (Slowther et al 2012).…”

“…However, the research conducted by Prince et al showed that in 85% of cases the committee members were bioethicists or philosophers. As many as 41% of surveyed teams considered education in the field of bioethics to be an important membership requirement, and 5% considered having a bioethics education to be a necessary condition for membership in the committee (Prince et al 2017). Also, according to the results of Slowther et al research, most ethics committees were composed of ethical experts (60%) (Slowther et al 2012).…”

Introduction

“…In addition to their knowledge and positions in the institution, a number of personal qualities of its members are critical to the success of an HEC. While about a quarter of HECs require references and interviews to become a member, some have an expectation that members will also demonstrate character traits like integrity and honesty (Prince et al, 2017). Further, members must demonstrate a sincere belief in the importance of the committee's work and be willing to devote significant time and energy to it.…”

“…Further, length of service on the committee varies as well. About half of the HECs in the country have unlimited terms, while others have restricted terms as short as 1 year (Prince et al, 2017). Short terms and a rapidly rotating membership will result in instability and inexperience, whereas indefinite or permanent membership may burden a committee with uninterested and unproductive members.…”