Friday, November 23, 2007

Leaven #18


“So what are your deliverables?”

I attended a Cardinals game several weeks ago with a new friend. He works in computer programming and software development. As we exited Busch Stadium, he asked -- "So what are your deliverables?"

The question caught me off guard. My mind was still on the game. I was not familiar with the word ‘deliverables’. I first linked his question to the pitchers’ 200+ ‘deliveries’ I had just witnessed. Then a phrase cluster began to form – “We deliver” . . . “the delivery truck” . . . “a well-delivered lecture” . . . “labor and delivery” . . . “delivering bad news” . . . My new friend wanted to know what I produce, what I contribute, what I complete where I work. Some of us can answer quickly, specifically, concretely. For others of us, our ‘deliverables’ are not so easily measured. We all begin each day intending to deliver.

I have attached what I hope in time will be considered a 'deliverable'! The diagram is still a work in progress. I would appreciate your testing it when you have the time to do so. Here is the story.

The impetus for the diagram came two months ago during our ethics consultation team's monthly continuing education discussion. We are using articles about ethical decision-making that have been published in the literature specific to various specialties (e.g., Ob/Gyn, Surgery, Internal Medicine, Emergency Medicine, Neurology, Psychiatry, Nursing, Social Work). The reading for the June meeting’s discussion was an American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists article. Several of the ethics consultation team members expressed familiarity with the article’s 'principles of medical ethics' language (i.e., 'non-maleficence', 'beneficence', ‘patient autonomy’, ‘justice’), but a lack of familiarity with the article's opening references to 'virtue ethics', 'care ethics', 'feminist ethics', 'communitarian ethics', 'casuistic ethics'. All agreed with one member's observation -- "The article does not explain or demonstrate how such approaches integrate with or relate to the four principles of medical ethics."

I only had a sketchy hand-drawn draft of this diagram by the July meeting. Since then, I have discussed a more complete draft with many individuals and groups variously positioned in the hospital -- e.g., attendings, fellows, residents, medical students, researchers, nurses, social workers, physical therapists, patient care leaders, chaplains, interpreters, patient safety specialists, medical school instructors. The responses have been very helpful and encouraging. As you consider the diagram, I suggest you --

Think of situations in which you have used varying combinations of the identified reasoning patterns to make decisions. The diagram’s short explanations for the reasoning patterns open the complexities in the personal experiences we bring to our professional responsibilities.

See the ‘stretching/reaching toward’ image in the etymology of ‘intention’. The use of 'intention' has brought to the surface what may be widespread reservation about the word 'principle' (e.g., "the word 'principle' is cold, calculating, mathematical -- like a geometry axiom", "the word 'principle' is easy to stay detached from", "the word 'principle' is abstract").

Notice the focus on ‘patient/s’. Caregivers take into account their other patients as they attend to any one patient.

Remember the ‘professional’ and ‘code/s of ethics’ commitments you have made to/before the public as well as to/before your peers. These alignments function as filters/lenses that discipline us toward alignment with the intentions patients are invited to expect/trust when we care for them.

Perhaps this diagram will sharpen our insight into how well-intended individuals can disagree about what ought to be done and reinforce our ability to find the least bruising resolutions to the resulting conflicts.

Think about it. Maybe talk to a coworker.