| 
	
		
				
			
				A Study on Attitude of Ethical Dilemmas in Clinical Nurses														
			
			Ju Hee Kim, Soo Yeon Ahn, Ji Yoon Kim, Ju Yeon Chung, Ji Mee Kim, Sun Ha Choi, Young Eun Kwon, Mi Young Chon, Myoung Hee Kim			
				Journal of Nurses Academic Society 1995;25(3):496-509.   Published online March 30, 2017			
									DOI: https://doi.org/10.4040/jnas.1995.25.3.496
							
							 
				
										
										 Abstract  PDF
This study was conducted to identify the attitude of ethical dilemmas in hospital nurses. Ethical dilemmas were categorized into four areas: human life area, clients area, nursing practice area, and nurses-co-worker area. 354 nurses working in clinical settings were selected in Seoul and Kangwon area. Data were gathered from 26, June to 10, July, 1994 by structured guestionnaires. Descriptive statistics were employed to analyze the data. The results obtained from data were as follows: 1) In human life area mean score was 3.03. This area showed remarkabale individual differences between utilitarian and deonto-logical position. 2) In clients area mean score was 3.94. It means that nurses tend to take a deonto-logical position. 3) In nursing practice area mean score was 3.41. It means that nurses tend to take a slightly deontological position. 4) In nurses-co-worker area mean score was 3. It means that nurses tend to take a deont-ological position. To conclude, clinents area, nursing practice area, and nurses-co-worker area taken deontological position. Most nurse's primary concern was the 'welfare of the patients' which is to fundamental ethical professional practice. But nurses experienced more ethical dilemmas in human life area than others. Therefore, nurses should be prepared to make independent decision that based on bio-ethics and professional ethics.
					Citations Citations to this article as recorded by   Case Development on Nurses' Ethical Dilemmas with Physicians' and Nurses' Decision MakingJeong-Mee Jeong, Jung-Hyun Park, Seok Hee Jeong
 Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration.2013; 19(5): 668.     CrossRef
 
		
			509
			View
		
			2
			Download
		
			1
			Crossref
		 |