Comparing Ethics Consultation in Alzheimer's Cases in the US and Japan
Author Information
Author(s): Nagao Noriko, Aulisio Mark P, Nukaga Yoshio, Fujita Misao, Kosugi Shinji, Youngner Stuart, Akabayashi Akira
Hypothesis
How do American and Japanese experts analyze an Alzheimer's case regarding ethics consultation?
Conclusion
Consensus building through an 'ethics facilitation' approach may be common in ethics consultation practices in the US and Japan, but differences exist in recommendations and surrogate assessments.
Supporting Evidence
- Both American and Japanese experts aimed to establish a consensus in their recommendations.
- The American team emphasized contacting the grandson for surrogate decision-making, while the Japanese team focused on the daughter-in-law.
- Differences in treatment recommendations were based on cultural perspectives on end-of-life care.
Takeaway
Experts from the US and Japan looked at the same Alzheimer's case but had different ideas about who should make decisions and what treatments to suggest.
Methodology
The study involved presenting a case to four experts (two from the US and two from Japan) and collecting their responses through questionnaires and interviews.
Potential Biases
The small sample size and selection of participants may introduce bias in the findings.
Limitations
The study was limited to four experts and focused on a single case, which may not represent broader practices.
Participant Demographics
All participants were male experts in medicine and ethics from the US and Japan.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website