Dignity of Risk: Taking Professional Leaps
Time: 11:15 AM to 12:15 PM
Description
Dignity of risk refers to the idea that the right to self-determination — and the ability to take reasonable risks — is inherent to personal dignity and self-esteem. Introduced by Robert Perske in 1972, the concept initially focused on individuals with intellectual disabilities (Perske, 1972). It is an ethical principle that often informs collaboration, discovery and decision-making involving patients, clients and families.
The concept highlighted structures and attitudes that foster overprotection, potentially limiting autonomous choices. While such choices may involve judgments about risk, they can also lead to greater self-knowledge and recognition of one’s potential. Perske emphasized that excessive protectiveness carries its own risk — namely, diminishing personal dignity.
Over time, the concept has expanded to broader populations and additional aspects of care, including healthcare discharge planning, where differing judgments about safety parameters can create discomfort and distress among care teams, patients and families (Mukherjee, 2015).
This presentation applies the principle of dignity of risk to clinical practice in serious illness care, examining the cognitive and emotional dimensions of individuals and their circumstances. It explores decisions related to risk-taking and intervention at micro, mezzo and macro levels, with attention to issues of social justice, social drivers of health and institutional hierarchies.
Learning Outcomes
Define the dignity of risk principle as it relates to the work of healthcare clinicians and aspects of practice, such as educational models, institutional policies and political structures that impact patient experience throughout the care continuum.
Provide three examples of how to integrate the “dignity of risk” principle in work at the micro, mezzo and macro levels of practice.
Identify opportunities in discharge planning and care transitions where applying dignity of risk principles could impact institutional response, patient outcomes and professional identity.