'There should be something gained': Carers' ethical reasoning about using a common staff approach in psychiatric in-care. (December 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Enarsson, Per; Sandman, Per-Olof; Hellzen, Ove
• Is Part Of: Nordic journal of nursing research. Volume 37:Number 4(2017:Dec.)
• Page Start: 217
• Page End: 225
• Publication Date: 2017-12
• Subjects: common approach -- content analysis -- ethics -- nursing -- psychiatry -- vignette; Nursing -- Periodicals; Nursing -- Scandinavia -- Periodicals; 610.73
• DOI: 10.1177/2057158517699098
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2057-1585

Abstract

Thirteen carers were interviewed about their ethical reasoning when using a common staff approach to restricting smoking for a psychiatric in-patient. A constructed case structure and a vignette method were used in the interviews, and manifest content analysis of the texts exposed five ethical positions adopted by the carers: 'best for the person', 'best for the patient', 'best for others involved with the person/patient', 'best for me as a carer', and 'best according to rules and regulations'. A second manifest content analysis of language showed terms that expressed value judgments in regard to the carers' personal experiences. Some carers argued at first from one ethical position, but when the question was changed, they argued from an opposite ethical position. Results may be understood in light of dialog philosophy; ethical reasoning during use of a common staff approach tends to focus either on relations with others or with oneself.