Sometimes, not always, not never: a response to Pickard and Pearce
This paper provides a response to Hanna Pickard and Stephen Pearce’s paper ‘Balancing costs and benefits: a clinical perspective does not support a harm minimisation approach for self-injury outside of community settings.’ This paper responded to my article ‘Should healthcare professionals sometimes...
Главный автор: | |
---|---|
Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
Язык: | Английский |
Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Опубликовано: |
BMJ Publ.
2018
|
В: |
Journal of medical ethics
Год: 2018, Том: 44, Выпуск: 3, Страницы: 209-210 |
Online-ссылка: |
Presumably Free Access Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
Итог: | This paper provides a response to Hanna Pickard and Stephen Pearce’s paper ‘Balancing costs and benefits: a clinical perspective does not support a harm minimisation approach for self-injury outside of community settings.’ This paper responded to my article ‘Should healthcare professionals sometimes allow harm? The case of self-injury.’ There is much in the paper that I would agree with, but I feel it is important to respond to a number of the criticisms of my paper in order to clarify my position and to facilitate ongoing debate in relation to this important issue. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1473-4257 |
Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Journal of medical ethics
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2017-104343 |