Search published articles


Showing 3 results for Hosseinabadi Farahani

Mohammadjavad Hosseinabadi Farahani,
Volume 17, Issue 0 (Supplement of 11th Annual Iranian Congress of Medical Ethics 2024)
Abstract

Ethical challenges and concerns have long been a part of healthcare, primarily focusing on acute care or end-of-life decisions. However, with the growing elderly population and society's emphasis on restoring patients to the highest possible level of functioning, ethical dilemmas in rehabilitation care have garnered increasing attention. Ethical decisions are a routine part of rehabilitation care. While some are straightforward, such as obtaining informed consent for therapeutic and rehabilitation procedures, others are far more complex. Among the most significant challenges are resource allocation and the selection of patients for rehabilitation services. The process of selecting patients for admission to rehabilitation centers is typically carried out by specialist physicians. However, many centers face demand that exceeds their capacity, necessitating difficult decisions about patient prioritization. Although some centers may have clear guidelines, patient selection is often subjective, involving multiple factors such as:
  • Clinical considerations: Diagnosis, prognosis, secondary complications, and learning ability.
  • Non-clinical factors: Social, occupational, personal, and financial circumstances.
This subjectivity in patient selection raises several ethical concerns. The rights, duties, and responsibilities of both patients and physicians must be carefully weighed. The potential for injustice exists when decisions become overly subjective, leading to possible inequities in resource allocation. Balancing the ethical principles of beneficence (acting in the patient’s best interest) and justice (fair distribution of resources) is essential but can be challenging, as these principles may occasionally conflict. To address these issues, members of the rehabilitation team, particularly physicians, must strive to minimize subjectivity in their decisions. Additionally, it is important to implement follow-up mechanisms for patients initially denied admission, ensuring that any changes in their condition are reevaluated. Medical and rehabilitation ethicists should prioritize the development of clear, evidence-based guidelines for patient selection and admission. These guidelines should be made accessible to the rehabilitation team to promote fairness, transparency, and consistency in decision-making, ultimately ensuring that resources are allocated equitably to those in need.

Mohammad Javad Hosseinabadi Farahani,
Volume 17, Issue 0 (Supplement of 11th Annual Iranian Congress of Medical Ethics 2024)
Abstract

Rehabilitation in disaster contexts, as part of the overall medical response, faces unique challenges, particularly during the early stages of post-disaster intervention. This is largely due to the relatively new integration of rehabilitation into disaster management. The four principles of bioethics—autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice—are essential considerations in immediate post-disaster relief efforts and in the subsequent long-term rehabilitation processes. This review study involved a purposeful search of reliable databases using predetermined keywords, covering the period from 2000 to 2024. The reviewed studies highlight several ethical dilemmas in delivering rehabilitation services after crises and disasters. These challenges arise due to factors such as:
· Resource limitations,
· Insufficient focus on rehabilitation within health systems,
· Shortages of rehabilitation specialists,
· Inadequate follow-up cares post-discharge,
· Limited awareness of the significance of rehabilitation, and
· Stigma associated with disability.
Despite these challenges, it is critical to uphold the four principles of biomedical ethics even in crisis situations. Adhering to these principles ensures that rehabilitation services align with professional norms, ethical standards, and the medical aspects of the local culture. Furthermore, policies aimed at enhancing the status and importance of rehabilitation immediately after crises and disasters must emphasize the equitable distribution of resources.

Mohammad Javad Hosseinabadi Farahani,
Volume 17, Issue 0 (Supplement of 11th Annual Iranian Congress of Medical Ethics 2024)
Abstract

Rehabilitation in disaster contexts, as part of the overall medical response, faces unique challenges, particularly during the early stages of post-disaster intervention. This is largely due to the relatively new integration of rehabilitation into disaster management. The four principles of bioethics—autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice—are essential considerations in immediate post-disaster relief efforts and in the subsequent long-term rehabilitation processes. This review study involved a purposeful search of reliable databases using predetermined keywords, covering the period from 2000 to 2024. The reviewed studies highlight several ethical dilemmas in delivering rehabilitation services after crises and disasters. These challenges arise due to factors such as:
· Resource limitations,
· Insufficient focus on rehabilitation within health systems,
· Shortages of rehabilitation specialists,
· Inadequate follow-up cares post-discharge,
· Limited awareness of the significance of rehabilitation, and
· Stigma associated with disability.
Despite these challenges, it is critical to uphold the four principles of biomedical ethics even in crisis situations. Adhering to these principles ensures that rehabilitation services align with professional norms, ethical standards, and the medical aspects of the local culture. Furthermore, policies aimed at enhancing the status and importance of rehabilitation immediately after crises and disasters must emphasize the equitable distribution of resources.


Page 1 from 1     

© 2026 , Tehran University of Medical Sciences, CC BY-NC 4.0

Designed & Developed by: Yektaweb