Le but de la recherche est d’étudier les tensions éthiques que peuvent vivre les médecins militaires, qui doivent agir à la fois comme soignants, militaires (même s’ils sont non combattants) et parfois comme acteurs humanitaires. Parmi la littérature sur l’éthique de la médecine militaire, les dilemmes la concernant sont souvent présentés comme le fruit de pressions réelles ou perçues provenant de l’institution militaire, des règles, codes, lois ou de politiques, ceci afin de détourner le médecin de son but premier, soit l’intérêt du patient. Pour mieux comprendre les défis éthiques auxquels sont confrontés les médecins militaires canadiens et comment ceux-ci les traitent, la recherche utilise une approche de bioéthique empirique. À partir d’une analyse de la littérature, nous examinons les dilemmes éthiques des médecins militaires, le concept de profession, ainsi que les codes d’éthique (médicaux et militaires) canadiens. L’expérience éthique est ensuite explorée à partir d’entrevues semi-directives effectuées auprès de quatorze médecins militaires ayant participé à des missions opérationnelles, notamment à Kandahar en Afghanistan, entre 2006 et 2010. Les résultats, tant conceptuels qu’empiriques, nous indiquent que plusieurs nuances s’imposent. Tout d’abord, les médecins militaires canadiens ne vivent pas les dilemmes tels qu’ils sont présentés dans la littérature, ni en nombre ni en fréquence. Ils sont conscients qu’ils doivent à la fois tenir compte de l’intérêt du patient et du bien commun, mais n’en ressentent pas pour autant un sentiment de double loyauté professionnelle. De plus, ils ont l’impression de partager l’objectif de la mission qui est de maintenir la force de combat. Des distinctions s’imposent aussi entre les médecins eux-mêmes, dans la conception qu’ils se font de leur profession, ainsi que dans les contextes (opération ou garnison), selon le type de travail qu’ils exercent (généraliste ou spécialiste). Les principaux défis éthiques rapportés portent sur les inégalités de soins entre les soldats de la coalition et les victimes locales (soldats et civils), ainsi que sur le manque de ressources, engendrant des décisions cliniques éprouvantes. Un résultat étonnant des entrevues est la présence de deux groupes distincts au plan de l’identification professionnelle. Huit médecins militaires se considèrent avant tout comme médecin, alors que les six autres ne sont pas arrivés à accorder une priorité à l’une ou l’autre des professions. Ces deux groupes se différencient également sur d’autres plans, comme le nombre et le type de défis éthiques identifiés, ainsi que les mécanismes de résolution des dilemmes utilisés. Malgré les formations éthiques offertes par l’institution, des lacunes subsistent dans la capacité d’identification des expériences éthiques et des valeurs impliquées, de même que des mécanismes de résolution utilisés. Compte tenu du faible échantillonnage, ces résultats sont difficilement généralisables. Néanmoins, ils peuvent nous inspirer au niveau théorique en faisant ressortir le caractère multidimensionnel de la médecine militaire, ainsi qu’au niveau pratique en nous permettant de suggérer des éléments de formation facilitant la réflexion éthique des médecins militaires. / The aim of this project is to study the ethical tensions that can be experienced by military physicians who must be, at the same time, healers, soldiers (even if they are non-combatants) and sometimes humanitarian actors. In the literature on the ethics of military medicine, potential ethical dilemmas are often presented as the result of pressures, real or perceived, from the military institution, rules, codes, laws or policies that divert physicians from their primary goal, i.e., the interest of the patient. To better understand the ethical challenges faced by Canadian military physicians and how these are dealt with, this project uses an empirical bioethics approach. Based on a literature review, I examine the ethical dilemmas of military physicians, the concept of profession, and Canadian codes of ethics (medical and military). The ethical experience is then explored through semi-structured interviews with 14 military physicians who participated in operational missions, particularly in Kandahar, Afghanistan between 2006 and 2010. Both the conceptual and empirical results indicate that nuance is required. First, Canadian military physicians do not experience dilemmas as presented in the literature, in number or in frequency. They are aware that they must take into account both the patient’s interest and the common good but do not experience this as a sense of dual professional loyalty. In addition, they feel that they share the mission objective, which is to maintain the fighting force. Distinctions are also needed between physicians themselves, in the conception they have of their profession, and in the context (training or garrison) and the type of work they do (general practitioner or specialist). The main dilemmas reported concern inequalities in the provision of care between coalition soldiers and locals (soldiers and civilians) as well as the lack of resources that generate challenging clinical decisions. A surprising result of the interviews is the presence of two distinct groups in terms of professional identity. Eight military physicians saw themselves primarily as physicians, while the other six did not give priority to one or the other professions (military or medicine). These two groups differ in other dimensions, such as the number and type of identified ethical challenges and dilemma resolution mechanisms. Despite the ethical training courses offered by the military institution, gaps persist in the ability to identify ethical experiences, the values involved and the appropriate resolution mechanisms. Given the small sample size, these results are difficult to generalize. Nevertheless, these findings provide theoretical insights, highlighting the multidimensional nature of military medicine, and practical considerations, by enabling the identification of aspects to improve training and so facilitate ethical reflection on the part of military physicians.

This study was designed to evaluate the quality of informed consent practiced by healthcare professionals in South Africa using an empirical quantitative methodology combined with medicolegal analysis to produce an interdisciplinary thesis on bioethics and medical law. Informed consent is an ethical and legal doctrine derived from the principle of respect for autonomy, whereas the rights to bodily integrity, privacy and human dignity are constitutionally protected in South Africa. The National Health Act 61 of 2003 codified requirements for informed consent by stipulating that healthcare providers must inform healthcare users about diagnosis, risks, benefits, treatment options, and the right of refusal, while taking into consideration users language and literacy levels. However, African communities are inherently challenged by problems of poverty, poor education, power asymmetry, and unfamiliarity with libertarian rights-based autonomy, which could affect informed consent practice. An empirical study was conducted at randomly selected public hospitals in EThekwini metropolitan municipality involving 927 participants; comprising 168 medical doctors, 355 professional nurses, and 404 patients. The study showed that healthcare professionals had limited knowledge regarding ethical and legal requirements for informed consent, and were partially compliant with current informed consent regulations. Barriers to informed consent identified were language, poor education, workload, and lack of interpreters. Most patients attending public hospitals were indigent, but preferred full information disclosure, and a shift from informed to shared-healthcare decision-making. The study recommends that a corps of trained interpreters should be introduced at public hospitals. This will improve providerpatient communications and minimize workloads, increase job satisfaction, and the overall quality of healthcare service delivery. Analysis of recent South African case law on informed consent revealed vacillations between the “reasonable doctor” and “prudent patient” standards of information disclosure which are inconsistent with the jurisprudence from comparative foreign common law jurisdictions. Therefore, South African court judgments on informed consent ought to be re-evaluated to establish a uniform standard of information disclosure consistent with international jurisprudence, current legislation, and constitutional protections relating to human dignity and security of the person. / Jurisprudence / LL. D.