The Experts below are selected from a list of 216 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Sue Wilson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Non-Professional Healthcare Workers and Ethical Obligations to Work during Pandemic Influenza
Public Health Ethics, 2009Co-Authors: Heather Draper, Tom Sorell, Jonathan Ives, Sarah Damery, Sheila Greenfield, Jayne Parry, Judith Petts, Sue WilsonAbstract:Most academic papers on ethics in pandemics concentrate on the duties of healthcare professionals. This paper will consider non-professional healthcare Workers: do they have a moral Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic? If so, is this an Obligation that outweighs others they might have, e.g., as parents, and should such an Obligation be backed up by the coercive power of law? This paper considers whether non-professional healthcare Workers—porters, domestic service Workers, catering staff, clerks, IT support Workers, etc.—have an Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic. It uses data collected as part of a study looking at the attitudes of healthcare Workers to Working during a pandemic to suggest the philosophical arguments explored. These include: being in a position to do good, the ethics of Work, competing Obligations to family members and in particular to children and the Obligations of citizens in a state of national emergency. We also look at whether compulsory measures are justified to support a national health service during a health emergency. We conclude that even if they are, compulsion should not be restricted to non-professionals who happen to be Working in the health service at the time. Rather, compulsion involving a larger pool of people with the relevant skills and abilities is more equitable.
-
Healthcare Workers' attitudes to Working during pandemic influenza: a qualitative study
BMC public health, 2009Co-Authors: Jonathan Ives, Heather Draper, Tom Sorell, Sheila Greenfield, Jayne Parry, Judith Petts, Christine Gratus, Sue WilsonAbstract:Healthcare Workers (HCWs) will play a key role in any response to pandemic influenza, and the UK healthcare system's ability to cope during an influenza pandemic will depend, to a large extent, on the number of HCWs who are able and willing to Work through the crisis. UK emergency planning will be improved if planners have a better understanding of the reasons UK HCWs may have for their absenteeism, and what might motivate them to Work during an influenza pandemic. This paper reports the results of a qualitative study that explored UK HCWs' views (n = 64) about Working during an influenza pandemic, in order to identify factors that might influence their willingness and ability to Work and to identify potential sources of any perceived duty on HCWs to Work. A qualitative study, using focus groups (n = 9) and interviews (n = 5). HCWs across a range of roles and grades tended to feel motivated by a sense of Obligation to Work through an influenza pandemic. A number of significant barriers that may prevent them from doing so were also identified. Perceived barriers to the ability to Work included being ill oneself, transport difficulties, and childcare responsibilities. Perceived barriers to the willingness to Work included: prioritising the wellbeing of family members; a lack of trust in, and goodwill towards, the NHS; a lack of information about the risks and what is expected of them during the crisis; fear of litigation; and the feeling that employers do not take the needs of staff seriously. Barriers to ability and barriers to willingness, however, are difficult to separate out. Although our participants tended to feel a general Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic, there are barriers to Working, which, if generalisable, may significantly reduce the NHS Workforce during a pandemic. The barriers identified are both barriers to willingness and to ability. This suggests that pandemic planning needs to take into account the possibility that staff may be absent for reasons beyond those currently anticipated in UK planning documents. In particular, staff who are physically able to attend Work may nonetheless be unwilling to do so. Although there are some barriers that cannot be mitigated by employers (such as illness, transport infrastructure etc.), there are a number of remedial steps that can be taken to lesson the impact of others (providing accommodation, building reciprocity, provision of information and guidance etc). We suggest that barriers to Working lie along an ability/willingness continuum, and that absenteeism may be reduced by taking steps to prevent barriers to willingness becoming perceived barriers to ability.
Jonathan Ives - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Non-Professional Healthcare Workers and Ethical Obligations to Work during Pandemic Influenza
Public Health Ethics, 2009Co-Authors: Heather Draper, Tom Sorell, Jonathan Ives, Sarah Damery, Sheila Greenfield, Jayne Parry, Judith Petts, Sue WilsonAbstract:Most academic papers on ethics in pandemics concentrate on the duties of healthcare professionals. This paper will consider non-professional healthcare Workers: do they have a moral Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic? If so, is this an Obligation that outweighs others they might have, e.g., as parents, and should such an Obligation be backed up by the coercive power of law? This paper considers whether non-professional healthcare Workers—porters, domestic service Workers, catering staff, clerks, IT support Workers, etc.—have an Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic. It uses data collected as part of a study looking at the attitudes of healthcare Workers to Working during a pandemic to suggest the philosophical arguments explored. These include: being in a position to do good, the ethics of Work, competing Obligations to family members and in particular to children and the Obligations of citizens in a state of national emergency. We also look at whether compulsory measures are justified to support a national health service during a health emergency. We conclude that even if they are, compulsion should not be restricted to non-professionals who happen to be Working in the health service at the time. Rather, compulsion involving a larger pool of people with the relevant skills and abilities is more equitable.
-
Healthcare Workers' attitudes to Working during pandemic influenza: a qualitative study
BMC public health, 2009Co-Authors: Jonathan Ives, Heather Draper, Tom Sorell, Sheila Greenfield, Jayne Parry, Judith Petts, Christine Gratus, Sue WilsonAbstract:Healthcare Workers (HCWs) will play a key role in any response to pandemic influenza, and the UK healthcare system's ability to cope during an influenza pandemic will depend, to a large extent, on the number of HCWs who are able and willing to Work through the crisis. UK emergency planning will be improved if planners have a better understanding of the reasons UK HCWs may have for their absenteeism, and what might motivate them to Work during an influenza pandemic. This paper reports the results of a qualitative study that explored UK HCWs' views (n = 64) about Working during an influenza pandemic, in order to identify factors that might influence their willingness and ability to Work and to identify potential sources of any perceived duty on HCWs to Work. A qualitative study, using focus groups (n = 9) and interviews (n = 5). HCWs across a range of roles and grades tended to feel motivated by a sense of Obligation to Work through an influenza pandemic. A number of significant barriers that may prevent them from doing so were also identified. Perceived barriers to the ability to Work included being ill oneself, transport difficulties, and childcare responsibilities. Perceived barriers to the willingness to Work included: prioritising the wellbeing of family members; a lack of trust in, and goodwill towards, the NHS; a lack of information about the risks and what is expected of them during the crisis; fear of litigation; and the feeling that employers do not take the needs of staff seriously. Barriers to ability and barriers to willingness, however, are difficult to separate out. Although our participants tended to feel a general Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic, there are barriers to Working, which, if generalisable, may significantly reduce the NHS Workforce during a pandemic. The barriers identified are both barriers to willingness and to ability. This suggests that pandemic planning needs to take into account the possibility that staff may be absent for reasons beyond those currently anticipated in UK planning documents. In particular, staff who are physically able to attend Work may nonetheless be unwilling to do so. Although there are some barriers that cannot be mitigated by employers (such as illness, transport infrastructure etc.), there are a number of remedial steps that can be taken to lesson the impact of others (providing accommodation, building reciprocity, provision of information and guidance etc). We suggest that barriers to Working lie along an ability/willingness continuum, and that absenteeism may be reduced by taking steps to prevent barriers to willingness becoming perceived barriers to ability.
Heather Draper - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Non-Professional Healthcare Workers and Ethical Obligations to Work during Pandemic Influenza
Public Health Ethics, 2009Co-Authors: Heather Draper, Tom Sorell, Jonathan Ives, Sarah Damery, Sheila Greenfield, Jayne Parry, Judith Petts, Sue WilsonAbstract:Most academic papers on ethics in pandemics concentrate on the duties of healthcare professionals. This paper will consider non-professional healthcare Workers: do they have a moral Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic? If so, is this an Obligation that outweighs others they might have, e.g., as parents, and should such an Obligation be backed up by the coercive power of law? This paper considers whether non-professional healthcare Workers—porters, domestic service Workers, catering staff, clerks, IT support Workers, etc.—have an Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic. It uses data collected as part of a study looking at the attitudes of healthcare Workers to Working during a pandemic to suggest the philosophical arguments explored. These include: being in a position to do good, the ethics of Work, competing Obligations to family members and in particular to children and the Obligations of citizens in a state of national emergency. We also look at whether compulsory measures are justified to support a national health service during a health emergency. We conclude that even if they are, compulsion should not be restricted to non-professionals who happen to be Working in the health service at the time. Rather, compulsion involving a larger pool of people with the relevant skills and abilities is more equitable.
-
Healthcare Workers' attitudes to Working during pandemic influenza: a qualitative study
BMC public health, 2009Co-Authors: Jonathan Ives, Heather Draper, Tom Sorell, Sheila Greenfield, Jayne Parry, Judith Petts, Christine Gratus, Sue WilsonAbstract:Healthcare Workers (HCWs) will play a key role in any response to pandemic influenza, and the UK healthcare system's ability to cope during an influenza pandemic will depend, to a large extent, on the number of HCWs who are able and willing to Work through the crisis. UK emergency planning will be improved if planners have a better understanding of the reasons UK HCWs may have for their absenteeism, and what might motivate them to Work during an influenza pandemic. This paper reports the results of a qualitative study that explored UK HCWs' views (n = 64) about Working during an influenza pandemic, in order to identify factors that might influence their willingness and ability to Work and to identify potential sources of any perceived duty on HCWs to Work. A qualitative study, using focus groups (n = 9) and interviews (n = 5). HCWs across a range of roles and grades tended to feel motivated by a sense of Obligation to Work through an influenza pandemic. A number of significant barriers that may prevent them from doing so were also identified. Perceived barriers to the ability to Work included being ill oneself, transport difficulties, and childcare responsibilities. Perceived barriers to the willingness to Work included: prioritising the wellbeing of family members; a lack of trust in, and goodwill towards, the NHS; a lack of information about the risks and what is expected of them during the crisis; fear of litigation; and the feeling that employers do not take the needs of staff seriously. Barriers to ability and barriers to willingness, however, are difficult to separate out. Although our participants tended to feel a general Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic, there are barriers to Working, which, if generalisable, may significantly reduce the NHS Workforce during a pandemic. The barriers identified are both barriers to willingness and to ability. This suggests that pandemic planning needs to take into account the possibility that staff may be absent for reasons beyond those currently anticipated in UK planning documents. In particular, staff who are physically able to attend Work may nonetheless be unwilling to do so. Although there are some barriers that cannot be mitigated by employers (such as illness, transport infrastructure etc.), there are a number of remedial steps that can be taken to lesson the impact of others (providing accommodation, building reciprocity, provision of information and guidance etc). We suggest that barriers to Working lie along an ability/willingness continuum, and that absenteeism may be reduced by taking steps to prevent barriers to willingness becoming perceived barriers to ability.
Cynthia L. Grant - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Restorative Justice: A Systematic Review of the Social Work Literature
Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 2009Co-Authors: Edward J. Gumz, Cynthia L. GrantAbstract:Restorative justice is an alternative paradigm for dealing with the effects of crime and wrongdoing that seeks to bring healing to victims, offenders, and the community. Although a key element of social Work's ethical code is the Obligation to Work toward social justice, this has been viewed primarily as efforts to ensure a fair distribution of resources and opportunities. Yet justice is also restorative in nature–-seeking to restore and enhance victims, offenders, and communities to fuller functioning. This article systematically reviews 80 social Work peer-reviewed articles dealing with restorative justice. The role of social Workers in restorative justice programs remains largely unknown. Suggestions are made for enhancing social Work practice in the restorative justice arena.
-
restorative justice a systematic review of the social Work literature
Families in society-The journal of contemporary social services, 2009Co-Authors: Edward J. Gumz, Cynthia L. GrantAbstract:ABSTRACT Restorative justice is an alternative paradigm for dealing with the effects of crime and wrongdoing that seeks to bring healing to victims, offenders, and the community. Although a key element of social Work’s ethical code is the Obligation to Work toward social justice, this has been viewed primarily as efforts to ensure a fair distribution of resources and opportunities. Yet justice is also restorative in nature—seeking to restore and enhance victims, offenders, and communities to fuller functioning. This article systematically reviews 80 social Work peer-reviewed articles dealing with restorative justice. The role of social Workers in restorative justice programs remains largely unknown. Suggestions are made for enhancing social Work practice in the restorative justice arena.of persons who are considered to be at a low risk of reoffend-ing (Golder, Ivanoff, Cloud, Besel, mcKiernan, Bratt, & Bledsoe, 2005), there is an urgent need for alternative approaches to crime in this country. Golder et al. poignantly state, “Continued reliance on incarceration (i.e., incapacitation) as the primary strategy for reducing crime is not only expensive monetarily, but it has partic-ularly deleterious effects on poor, urban communities, especially communities of color” (p. 104).The practice of restorative justice offers victims, offenders, and communities an alternative approach for dealing with the harm caused by crime. In contrast to the aforementioned orienta-tion, restorative justice allows a three-dimensional approach that includes the victim, offender, and community (Bazemore, 1999). This trend away from the current criminal justice system (especially in regard to juvenile delinquency) may allow for comprehensive heal -ing and intervention with all parties impacted by a crime. Restorative justice practices thus offer the potential for decreased recidivism of offenders, fewer long-term effects of victimization, and strengthen -ing of the aggregate well-being of a community. Hence, a three-dimensional approach to crime benefits all parties involved.Historically, restorative justice has its roots in the indigenous rituals of New Zealand communities where shaming of the offender was used as punishment for wrongdoings. minority
Tom Sorell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Non-Professional Healthcare Workers and Ethical Obligations to Work during Pandemic Influenza
Public Health Ethics, 2009Co-Authors: Heather Draper, Tom Sorell, Jonathan Ives, Sarah Damery, Sheila Greenfield, Jayne Parry, Judith Petts, Sue WilsonAbstract:Most academic papers on ethics in pandemics concentrate on the duties of healthcare professionals. This paper will consider non-professional healthcare Workers: do they have a moral Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic? If so, is this an Obligation that outweighs others they might have, e.g., as parents, and should such an Obligation be backed up by the coercive power of law? This paper considers whether non-professional healthcare Workers—porters, domestic service Workers, catering staff, clerks, IT support Workers, etc.—have an Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic. It uses data collected as part of a study looking at the attitudes of healthcare Workers to Working during a pandemic to suggest the philosophical arguments explored. These include: being in a position to do good, the ethics of Work, competing Obligations to family members and in particular to children and the Obligations of citizens in a state of national emergency. We also look at whether compulsory measures are justified to support a national health service during a health emergency. We conclude that even if they are, compulsion should not be restricted to non-professionals who happen to be Working in the health service at the time. Rather, compulsion involving a larger pool of people with the relevant skills and abilities is more equitable.
-
Healthcare Workers' attitudes to Working during pandemic influenza: a qualitative study
BMC public health, 2009Co-Authors: Jonathan Ives, Heather Draper, Tom Sorell, Sheila Greenfield, Jayne Parry, Judith Petts, Christine Gratus, Sue WilsonAbstract:Healthcare Workers (HCWs) will play a key role in any response to pandemic influenza, and the UK healthcare system's ability to cope during an influenza pandemic will depend, to a large extent, on the number of HCWs who are able and willing to Work through the crisis. UK emergency planning will be improved if planners have a better understanding of the reasons UK HCWs may have for their absenteeism, and what might motivate them to Work during an influenza pandemic. This paper reports the results of a qualitative study that explored UK HCWs' views (n = 64) about Working during an influenza pandemic, in order to identify factors that might influence their willingness and ability to Work and to identify potential sources of any perceived duty on HCWs to Work. A qualitative study, using focus groups (n = 9) and interviews (n = 5). HCWs across a range of roles and grades tended to feel motivated by a sense of Obligation to Work through an influenza pandemic. A number of significant barriers that may prevent them from doing so were also identified. Perceived barriers to the ability to Work included being ill oneself, transport difficulties, and childcare responsibilities. Perceived barriers to the willingness to Work included: prioritising the wellbeing of family members; a lack of trust in, and goodwill towards, the NHS; a lack of information about the risks and what is expected of them during the crisis; fear of litigation; and the feeling that employers do not take the needs of staff seriously. Barriers to ability and barriers to willingness, however, are difficult to separate out. Although our participants tended to feel a general Obligation to Work during an influenza pandemic, there are barriers to Working, which, if generalisable, may significantly reduce the NHS Workforce during a pandemic. The barriers identified are both barriers to willingness and to ability. This suggests that pandemic planning needs to take into account the possibility that staff may be absent for reasons beyond those currently anticipated in UK planning documents. In particular, staff who are physically able to attend Work may nonetheless be unwilling to do so. Although there are some barriers that cannot be mitigated by employers (such as illness, transport infrastructure etc.), there are a number of remedial steps that can be taken to lesson the impact of others (providing accommodation, building reciprocity, provision of information and guidance etc). We suggest that barriers to Working lie along an ability/willingness continuum, and that absenteeism may be reduced by taking steps to prevent barriers to willingness becoming perceived barriers to ability.