Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 3/2018

16.07.2018 | Symposium: Collective Representation in Healthcare Policy

One For All, All For One? Collective Representation in Healthcare Policy

verfasst von: Karin Jongsma, Nitzan Rimon-Zarfaty, Aviad Raz, Silke Schicktanz

Erschienen in: Journal of Bioethical Inquiry | Ausgabe 3/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Healthcare collectives, such as patient organizations, advocacy groups, disability organizations, professional associations, industry advocates, social movements, and health consumer organizations have been increasingly involved in healthcare policymaking. Such collectives are based on the idea that individual interests can be aggregated into collective interests by participation, deliberation, and representation. The topic of collectivity in healthcare, more specifically collective representation, has only rarely been addressed in (Western) bioethics. This symposium, entitled: “Collective Representation in Healthcare Policy” of the Journal of Bioethical Inquiry draws attention to this understudied topic from a variety of disciplines, within a variety of socio-cultural contexts. We draw attention to important ethical, cultural, and social questions, and into the practices, justifications for, and implications of collective representation of patients in healthcare policy.
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Beier, K, I. Jordan, C. Wiesemann, and S. Schicktanz. 2016. Understanding Collective Agency in Bioethics. Medicine Health Care and Philosophy 19(3): 411–22.CrossRef Beier, K, I. Jordan, C. Wiesemann, and S. Schicktanz. 2016. Understanding Collective Agency in Bioethics. Medicine Health Care and Philosophy 19(3): 411–22.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dryzek, J.S., 2000. Deliberative democracy and beyond. New York: Oxford University Press. Dryzek, J.S., 2000. Deliberative democracy and beyond. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Dumas, A. 1982. The three musketeers. New York: Penguin Classics. Dumas, A. 1982. The three musketeers. New York: Penguin Classics.
Zurück zum Zitat Epstein, S. 2008. Patient groups and health movements. In The handbook of science and technology studies, edited by E. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, W.J. Cambridge, 499–439. Cambridge: MIT Press. Epstein, S. 2008. Patient groups and health movements. In The handbook of science and technology studies, edited by E. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, W.J. Cambridge, 499–439. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Zurück zum Zitat ----. 2011. Measuring success: Scientific, institutional and cultural effects of patient advocacy. In Patients as policy actors, edited by B. Hoffman, 257–277. Rutgers University Press. ----. 2011. Measuring success: Scientific, institutional and cultural effects of patient advocacy. In Patients as policy actors, edited by B. Hoffman, 257–277. Rutgers University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Hutchison, K., W. Rogers, and V.A. Entwistle. 2017. Addressing deficits and injustices: The potential epistemic contributions of patients to research. Health Care Analysis 25(4): 386–403.CrossRef Hutchison, K., W. Rogers, and V.A. Entwistle. 2017. Addressing deficits and injustices: The potential epistemic contributions of patients to research. Health Care Analysis 25(4): 386–403.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gerhards, H., K. Jongsma, and S. Schicktanz. 2017. The relevance of different trust models for representation in patient organizations: Conceptual considerations. BMC Health Services Research 17(1): 474.CrossRef Gerhards, H., K. Jongsma, and S. Schicktanz. 2017. The relevance of different trust models for representation in patient organizations: Conceptual considerations. BMC Health Services Research 17(1): 474.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Pitkin, H.F. 1967. The concept of representation. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pitkin, H.F. 1967. The concept of representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Pugh, J. 2018. Navigating individual and collective interests in medical ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 44(1): 1–2.CrossRef Pugh, J. 2018. Navigating individual and collective interests in medical ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 44(1): 1–2.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Rojatz, D., J. Fischer, and H.M. van de Bovenkamp. 2018. Legislating patient representation: A comparison between Austrian and German regulations on self-help organizations as patient representatives. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 15(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-018-9864-7 Rojatz, D., J. Fischer, and H.M. van de Bovenkamp. 2018. Legislating patient representation: A comparison between Austrian and German regulations on self-help organizations as patient representatives. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 15(3). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11673-018-9864-7
Zurück zum Zitat Schicktanz, S. 2015. The ethical legitimacy of patient organizations’ involvement in politics and knowledge production: Epistemic justice as a conceptual basis. In The public shaping of medical research: Patient associations, health movements and biomedicine, edited by. P. Wehling, W. Viehover, and S. Koenen, 246–264. London, U.K.: Routledge. Schicktanz, S. 2015. The ethical legitimacy of patient organizations’ involvement in politics and knowledge production: Epistemic justice as a conceptual basis. In The public shaping of medical research: Patient associations, health movements and biomedicine, edited by. P. Wehling, W. Viehover, and S. Koenen, 246–264. London, U.K.: Routledge.
Metadaten
Titel
One For All, All For One? Collective Representation in Healthcare Policy
verfasst von
Karin Jongsma
Nitzan Rimon-Zarfaty
Aviad Raz
Silke Schicktanz
Publikationsdatum
16.07.2018
Verlag
Springer Singapore
Erschienen in
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry / Ausgabe 3/2018
Print ISSN: 1176-7529
Elektronische ISSN: 1872-4353
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-018-9870-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2018

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 3/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Symposium: Collective Representation in Healthcare Policy

Patient Representation and Advocacy for Alzheimer Disease in Germany and Israel