Search results

"In Europe, Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) has been well-known and established as a form of Clinical Ethics Support (CES) and implemented in many international (health care) institutions. Since 2007 Amsterdam UMC organizes training for professionals to become a facilitator of MCD. To support and asses the development of those future facilitators MCD, an instrument has been developed which can be used by both trainees and trainers. The instrument consists of a self-reflection form and an observation form. Both forms are almost identical and contain a part of open questions reflecting upon the personal learning goals of the trainee and a part of 56 closed questions. The part of closed questions contains concrete descriptions of preferred skills and attitude of the MCD facilitator trainee, related to MCD in general and the specific steps of the Dilemma method and the Socratic Dialogue in particular. Special attention is being paid to concrete actions for fostering a dialogue and deepening the moral inquiry. The instrument can also be used by trained and more experienced facilitators of MCD to reflect upon their acquired skills and attitude, and indirectly on the quality of CES they provide. In this presentation we will present the instrument and share our experiences in using the two forms in order to train and assess (the quality of) facilitators of MCD. Furthermore, we will present preliminary results of the analysis of more than 1200 forms collected in the past decade from trainings on national and international level. "

"Ethics support staff often help others to deal with moral challenges. However, they themselves can also experience moral challenges when practicing ethics support. Facilitators of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) sometimes for example experience ethical questions when it comes to (breaking) confidentiality. Facilitators might find themselves compelled to intervene or act upon things they hear or see whilst facilitating a MCD. For example, a MCD facilitator finds out that a participant does something illegal. Or, what to do if a MCD facilitator is asked to inform the Inspectorate about details of a MCD? When is a facilitator allowed or obligated to break confidentiality and share information with others? How to make such a decision? And, if allowed to break confidentiality, how to do this in a morally sound way? Currently there are no moral guidelines on how to act upon these questions. We conducted empirical research that explores moral challenges of MCD facilitators related to confidentiality and develops a moral compass which provides directions to approach these challenges. Data collection consists of three complementary methods: * analyses of 3 a 4 audiotaped and transcribed MCD sessions about how and when to break confidentiality; * in-depth interviews about the topic; * focus group to validate the findings and co-create a moral compass. In our presentation, we will reflect upon both the theoretical and normative considerations concerning confidentiality in ethics support and the empirical results of this study. Furthermore, we will present a preliminary version of a moral compass in order to strengthen the moral competency of MCD facilitators. "

"Promoting research integrity is crucial to achieve high quality and relevant results, and preserve public trust in science. In recent years, many codes of conducts, guidelines and regulations on national and international level, such as the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, have been issued to tackle this issue. However, these documents are often perceived as an externally imposed set of rules that researchers need to comply with in order to tick the box of integrity and get their research done. These research integrity efforts are important, but are they enough? We argue that in order to foster 'good' science, educating 'good' researchers is crucial. To respond to these issues, the VIRT2UE project has created an open source online training for researchers and educators that supports the internalization of the practices and principles of good science by building upon a virtue-based approach. Core elements of this approach are reflections on the intrinsic motivation of researchers and the cultivation of those moral characters which support the practices and principles of good science. The VIRT2UE training consists of a toolbox with training materials which can be used both online and offline, easy to use and adaptable to context. Starting from the assumption that virtues are learned through experience and by example, we will show what role trainers and educators can play in promoting a virtue-based approach to research integrity and what this implies for their own education and professionalization as trainers. "