IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v78y2013icp125-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The ongoing westernization of East Asian biomedical ethics in Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Yen-Yuan
  • Tsai, Shih-Li
  • Yang, Chih-Wei
  • Ni, Yen-Hsuan
  • Chang, Shan-Chwen

Abstract

Family autonomy/family-determination (FA/FD) is deeply rooted in Confucianism, and is an important core value in East Asian biomedical ethics. Individual autonomy/self-determination (IA/SD) did not originate in East Asia, and is the most important core value of Western biomedical ethics. IA/SD and FA/FD are different from each other not only because of where they originated but also in their general sense and moral foundations. We investigated the influence of Western biomedical ethics on the Eastern hemisphere. We examined the secular trends of IA/SD use in ethics and biomedical ethics articles published in Taiwan from 1991 to 2010. The published articles were collected from a popular online library called the Chinese Electronic Periodical Services. A total of 1737 articles were associated with ethics, and 300 of them were associated with biomedical ethics. The total number of times IA/SD was used in each ethics and biomedical ethics article was calculated. The secular trends were plotted graphically and analyzed by time series linear regression analysis. The results showed that the secular trend of the proportion of the yearly total of biomedical ethics articles to the yearly total of ethics articles was significantly increasing (p = 0.007). The secular trends of the average of times IA/SD showed that one unit of yearly increase was associated with an increment of 0.056 IA/SD use per ethics article (p < 0.001), and 0.331 IA/SD use per biomedical ethics article (p = 0.027), respectively. These findings suggest that Western biomedical ethics have become increasingly influential in Taiwan over the past two decades. Thus, assuming that FA/FD takes priority over IA/SD in an East Asian medical encounter is too simplistic. Whether FA/FD or IA/SD takes priority in a medical encounter should be carefully evaluated.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Yen-Yuan & Tsai, Shih-Li & Yang, Chih-Wei & Ni, Yen-Hsuan & Chang, Shan-Chwen, 2013. "The ongoing westernization of East Asian biomedical ethics in Taiwan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 125-129.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:78:y:2013:i:c:p:125-129
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.12.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953612008040
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.12.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Yin-Yang & Lin, Julia L., 2010. "Do patient autonomy preferences matter? Linking patient-centered care to patient-physician relationships and health outcomes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(10), pages 1811-1818, November.
    2. Charles, Cathy & Gafni, Amiram & Whelan, Tim, 1999. "Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 651-661, September.
    3. Elwyn, Todd S. & Fetters, Michael D. & Sasaki, Hiroki & Tsuda, Tsukasa, 2002. "Responsibility and cancer disclosure in Japan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 281-293, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Specker Sullivan, Laura, 2017. "Dynamic axes of informed consent in Japan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 159-168.
    2. Karnieli-Miller, Orit & Eisikovits, Zvi, 2009. "Physician as partner or salesman? Shared decision-making in real-time encounters," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 1-8, July.
    3. Paul C. Schroy III & Karen Emmons & Ellen Peters & Julie T. Glick & Patricia A. Robinson & Maria A. Lydotes & Shamini Mylvanaman & Stephen Evans & Christine Chaisson & Michael Pignone & Marianne Prout, 2011. "The Impact of a Novel Computer-Based Decision Aid on Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(1), pages 93-107, January.
    4. Jaime Moore & Matthew Haemer & Nazrat Mirza & Ying Z Weatherall & Joan Han & Caren Mangarelli & Mary Jane Hawkins & Stavra Xanthakos & Robert Siegel, 2019. "Pilot Testing of a Patient Decision Aid for Adolescents with Severe Obesity in US Pediatric Weight Management Programs within the COMPASS Network," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-12, May.
    5. Kevin Mertz & Romil F. Shah & Sara L. Eppler & Jeffrey Yao & Marc Safran & Ariel Palanca & Serena S. Hu & Michael Gardner & Derek F. Amanatullah & Robin N. Kamal, 2020. "A Simple Goal Elicitation Tool Improves Shared Decision Making in Outpatient Orthopedic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(6), pages 766-773, August.
    6. Sarah-Maude Deschênes & Marie-Pierre Gagnon & France Légaré & Annie Lapointe & Stéphane Turcotte & Sophie Desroches, 2013. "Psychosocial Factors of Dietitians' Intentions to Adopt Shared Decision Making Behaviours: A Cross-Sectional Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-7, May.
    7. Clarissa Hsu & David T. Liss & Dominick L. Frosch & Emily O. Westbrook & David Arterburn, 2017. "Exploring Provider Reactions to Decision Aid Distribution and Shared Decision Making," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 37(1), pages 113-126, January.
    8. Lee, Yin-Yang & Lin, Julia L., 2010. "Do patient autonomy preferences matter? Linking patient-centered care to patient-physician relationships and health outcomes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(10), pages 1811-1818, November.
    9. Coast, Joanna, 2018. "A history that goes hand in hand: Reflections on the development of health economics and the role played by Social Science & Medicine, 1967–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 227-232.
    10. Underman, Kelly & Hirshfield, Laura E., 2016. "Detached concern?: Emotional socialization in twenty-first century medical education," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 94-101.
    11. Chen Zhang & Kevin Fiscella & Yu Liu, 2022. "Exploring the Role of Provider–Patient Communication in Women’s Sexual Health and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Care in the Primary Care Settings in New York State of the United States," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-15, July.
    12. Carla Brailey & Brittany C. Slatton, 2024. "Centering Black Women’s Voices: Illuminating Systemic Racism in Maternal Healthcare Experiences," Societies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-12, May.
    13. Ishikawa, Hirono & Hashimoto, Hideki & Kiuchi, Takahiro, 2013. "The evolving concept of “patient-centeredness” in patient–physician communication research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 147-153.
    14. K. D. Valentine & Ha Vo & Floyd J. Fowler Jr. & Suzanne Brodney & Michael J. Barry & Karen R. Sepucha, 2021. "Development and Evaluation of the Shared Decision Making Process Scale: A Short Patient-Reported Measure," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(2), pages 108-119, February.
    15. Suzanne C. Makarem & Michael F. Smith & Susan M. Mudambi & James M. Hunt, 2014. "Why People Do Not Always Follow the Doctor's Orders: The Role of Hope and Perceived Control," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 457-485, October.
    16. Tate, Alexandra, 2020. "Invoking death: How oncologists discuss a deadly outcome," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    17. Wirtz, Veronika & Cribb, Alan & Barber, Nick, 2006. "Patient-doctor decision-making about treatment within the consultation--A critical analysis of models," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 116-124, January.
    18. Kirsten J. McCaffery & Sian K. Smith & Michael Wolf, 2010. "The Challenge of Shared Decision Making Among Patients With Lower Literacy: A Framework for Research and Development," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(1), pages 35-44, January.
    19. Dyer, Thomas Anthony & Owens, Janine & Robinson, Peter Glenn, 2014. "The acceptability of care delegation in skill-mix: The salience of trust," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 170-178.
    20. Pamela B. Peele & Laura A. Siminoff & Ying Xu & Peter M. Ravdin, 2005. "Decreased Use of Adjuvant Breast Cancer Therapy in a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Decision Aid with Individualized Risk Information," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 25(3), pages 301-307, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:78:y:2013:i:c:p:125-129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.