Background: Studies show that healthcare professionals often experience ethical difficulties in their relations with patients, relatives, and other professionals and in relation to organisational issues, and these can sometimes be difficult to handle. Failing to act or to relate in accordance with one’s values for what is good and right might cause a troubled conscience that is connected to feelings of guilt and ill-being. Ethical issues related to the care of patients with end-stage renal disease have been described, but no studies in this context have been found that explore registered nurses’ (RNs’) and physicians’ experiences of being in ethically difficult situations that give rise to a troubled conscience. The importance of communicating ethical issues in order to understand and handle ethically difficult care situations has been emphasized. Various forms of clinical ethics support (CES) have been described and evaluated, but studies on the communication processes and the organisation of CES interventions are sparse and no study describing a CES intervention based on Habermas’ theory of communicative action has been found. Aim: The overall aim was to increase our understanding about being in ethically difficult care situations and about how communication concerning ethical issues in healthcare can be promoted. More specifically, the aim of studies I and II was to illuminate experiences of being in ethically difficult situations giving rise to a troubled conscience among RNs and physicians, while studies III and IV aimed to describe the communication of value conflicts (III) and the organisation and performance of a CES intervention (IV). Methods: In studies I and II narrative interviews with ten RNs (I) and five physicians (II), were performed in a dialysis care context. The interviews were analysed using a phenomenological hermeneutic approach. In studies III and IV, eight audio- and video-recorded and two audio-recorded sessions of the CES intervention, were conducted and sorted by the data tool Transana and analysed in accordance with a qualitative content analysis (III) and a qualitative concept- and data-driven content analysis (IV). Results: The RNs’ narratives (I) resulted in the theme ‘Calling for a deliberative dialogue’. Their narratives expressed feelings of uncertainty, solitude, abandonment, and guilt in complex and ambiguous ethically difficult situations. The narratives concerned the value conflict between preserving life by all means and preserving life with dignity. The physicians’ narratives (II) resulted in the themes ‘Feeling trapped in irresolution’ and ‘Being torn by conflicting demands’. Their narratives expressed feelings of uncertainty, solitude, abandonment and guilt related to the obligation to make crucial decisions and in situations when their ideals and the reality iii clashed. The analysis of the communication of value conflicts during the CES intervention inspired by Habermas’ theory of communicative action (study III) revealed a process of five phases: a value conflict expressed as feelings of frustration, sharing disempowerment and helplessness, revelation of the value conflict, enhancing realistic expectations of the patients and relatives, and seeing opportunities to change the situation instead of obstacles. The CES intervention (study IV) was organised as a framework with a given structure and an openness for variations to facilitate communicative action. Three courses of actions to reach a communicative agreement were identified and concerned the approach to achieve a permissive communication, opening up for extended views, and enhancing mutual understanding (IV). Conclusion: The results show that both RNs and physicians expressed feelings of uncertainty abandonment and loneliness in similar ethically difficult situations but from different points of view. They struggled with the same value conflicts and feelings, but they did not share their struggles with each other. The lack of communication and confirmation led to distrust and increased feelings of uncertainty. The CES intervention, inspired by Habermas’ theory of communicative action, offered the possibility of dealing with experiences of ethically difficult care situations. In the permissive atmosphere, the professionals helped each other to balance their ambiguity, frustrations, and powerlessness and came to an agreement about how to handle the value conflicts and how to act. The findings from this CES intervention constitute a step towards a CES method that is clearly described so that leaders can be educated and extended intervention studies with different kinds of data can be conducted in order to further develop knowledge about how to promote an inter-professional dialogue about ethical difficulties.

The study of communication was born with the study of rhetoric, and scholars have been examining the creation and reception of messages for thousands of years. However, the term rhetoric often has negative connotations, as we hear people label some statement as “just rhetoric” or we hear them say, “The action doesn't match the rhetoric.” However, rhetoric is a style of communication that takes into account the effective use of both verbal and non-verbal languages, and it is one of the main ingredients in the day to day communication in organizations, healthcare organizations being no exception. It is virtually impossible to communicate without the use of rhetoric. This study focused on healthcare organizations because the delivery of healthcare is built on communication, and there is more to understand about the usage of language and organizational rhetoric in healthcare organizations. To these effects, the study examined communication in healthcare organizations and the perceived use of rhetoric among healthcare professionals; it explored how healthcare professionals perceive communication with their audiences, how the use of rhetoric, as perceived by healthcare professionals, affects communication in healthcare organizations and the contribution of rhetoric, as perceived by healthcare professionals, in motivating healthcare audience in healthcare organizations. The five canons of rhetoric were employed as a theoretical framework, and semi-structured interviews were used as tools for data collection. While contributing to existing literature on health and organizational communication, this study will also contribute in providing both government and private organizations insights into the use of rhetoric in professional communication with the hope of enhancing the quality of communication in the workplace.