Get started
Work

Global Comparison of Codes of Ethics for Nurses: A Mixed‐Method Collective Case Study Differentiating Aspirational and Mandatory Ethics

Year: 2024
Type: article
Abstract: AIMS: To identify the characteristics and compare the codes of ethics enacted by the Korean Nursing Association and International Council of Nurses. DESIGN: A mixed-method collective case study. METHODS: This study adopted interpretive approaches comprising case definition and selection, data collection, analysis and interpretation. Based on the developed aspirational versus mandatory ethics analytic framework, we differentiated the aspirational and mandatory codes of the Korean Nursing Association and International Council of Nurses. RESULTS: The Korean Nursing Association placed greater emphasis on aspirational ethics (73.3%) than the International Council of Nurses (53.6%). The Korean Nursing Association addressed legal implications regarding adequate services and patient safety, whereas the International Council of Nurses emphasised informed consent and authorised practice. Compared to the Korean Nursing Association's code, the International Council of Nurses' code had one additional chapter and 67 more units. The additional chapter focused on global health. CONCLUSION: Some implications can be considered for future revisions of the code of ethics for Korean nurses. Informed consent needs to be addressed as a legal implication for respecting the patient's right to self-determination. Furthermore, nurses' attention to global health could be discussed in the context of globalisation. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: The findings of the analysis of the current codes of ethics of national and international nursing organisations may provide scientific evidence for future revisions. An evidence-based revision of ethical guidelines, as proposed by the findings, underscores the importance of fostering a moral identity consistent with established professional norms and values for nursing. REPORTING METHOD: We adhered to the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Given that this study is based on the literature, namely the codes of ethics, there is no direct/indirect involvement of patients or the public.
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.17557
Language: English
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W4405689738
FWCI: 0.535
Cites: 37
Cited by: 1
Related to: 10