Espousing the innocence of paediatric patients: an innocent act?
John Thomas GebertPublished in: Journal of medical ethics (2024)
Since the 19th century, innocence has been a hallmark of childhood. The innocence of children is seen as both a sanctity worth defending and a feature that excuses the unavoidable mistakes of adolescence. While beneficial in many settings, notions of childhood innocence are often entangled with values judgements. Inherent in innocence is the notion that that which we are innocent of is undesirable. Further, attributing innocence to some implies the tolerability of blame for others. This has unique implications in a medical setting. This essay explores the implications of espousing the innocence of paediatric patients. Ultimately, because attribution of innocence is both prone to bias and rooted in the same framework as blame, it degrades patient-centred care and compromises the patient-provider relationship. I argue that avoiding such characterisations may allow providers to more effectively promote paediatric health.
Keyphrases
- end stage renal disease
- healthcare
- emergency department
- ejection fraction
- intensive care unit
- newly diagnosed
- chronic kidney disease
- peritoneal dialysis
- prognostic factors
- mental health
- young adults
- machine learning
- deep learning
- randomized controlled trial
- depressive symptoms
- clinical trial
- chronic pain
- patient reported outcomes
- social media
- climate change
- childhood cancer
- double blind