Abstract
During a clinical ethics fellow’s first week of independent supervised service, two unhoused patients on the same floor were resisting the medical team’s recommendations to discharge. In the team’s view, both were medically stable and no longer required hospitalization in an acute setting. The medical team suspected malingering for both. The social worker and case manager had employed their usual means of gentle persuasion and eliminating psychosocial barriers to no avail. Rather than call the police, the attending physician, social worker, and case manager decided to call ethics. These cases lead the fledgling fellow to consider the appropriate role for ethicists in difficult discharge cases. The article analyzes each case, evaluates their similarities and differences in the context of suspected malingering, and comments on ethical issues surrounding cases of suspected malingering. Finally, the authors reflect on the value and importance of developing and maintaining epistemic and professional independence.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 59-66 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Narrative inquiry in bioethics |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2024 |
Keywords
- Case Study
- Clinical Ethics
- Difficult Discharge
- Malingering
- Professional Norms
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- General Medicine
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Difficult Discharge in the Context of Suspected Malingering: Reflections on the Value of Epistemic and Professional Independence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS