Although courts shy away from cases that deal with a physician refusal to treat a patient they have enacted a law that lends support to this idea. This law is the Do Not Resituate law which currently 49 states have enacted some type of DNR law. A DNR order is a written order that states that CPR should not be provided to the patient. Unless a DNR is written the patient will receive CPR. However a couple of states have provided that “CPR made be withheld from a patient if in the judgment of a treating physician an attempt to resuscitate would be medically futile.” These efforts are considered medically futile “if they cannot restore cardiac function to the position or to achieve the expressed goals of the informed patient.” However a guardian or surrogate of the patient is allowed to override the DNR.
Ashley Bassel argues because the courts decided that futility issues are not to believe resolved in court there is a bioethical issue of who is able to make the decision to resolve this dispute. 90% of hospital has a full ethics committee or small team that supposed to perform an ethics consultation. According to the AMA the function of the committee should help to resolve unusual and complicated ethical problems that affect the care and treatment of patients. However whatever the ethic committees says are recommendations not obligations for the institution. However there are many scenarios where these ethics board are unable to solve the tricky problem of upholding the patient or guardian right to make medical decisions as well as the physician’s right to refuse treatment. As well as the case making sure that conflicts on interest to not impede on any ability to make the proper call on a patient health.
However ethic comm...
... middle of paper ...
...d Legal Framework for the Problem of Pain Mangement in Emergence Medicine, 33 JL MED AND Ethics 741,748 (2005)
Bassel, Ashley. 2010. "Order at the End of Life: Establishing a Clear and Fair Mechanism for the Resolution of Futility Disputes." Vanderbilt Law Review 63, no. 2: 495
Bassel, Ashley. 2010. "Order at the End of Life: Establishing a Clear and Fair Mechanism for the Resolution of Futility Disputes." Vanderbilt Law Review 63, no. 2: 507.
A.C., 573 A.2d 1235, 1264 n.2 (D.C. 1990)
Barber v. Superior Court of California, 147 Cal. App. 3d 10006, 1017-18, 195 Cal. Rptr. 484 (1983)
Rubin, Susan B.. When doctors say No the battleground of medical futility. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1998, pg 141.
Leach v. Shapiro 1984:1015)
(Meisel 1995:456-8)
American Medical ID website
Tenn. Hosp. rules and Regulations 1200-8-4.-.05[5][g]
Healthcare creates unique dilemmas that must consider the common good of every patient. Medical professionals, on a frequent basis, face situations that require complicated, and at times, difficult decision-making. The medical matters they decide on are often sensitive and critical in regards to patient needs and care. In the Case of Marguerite M and the Angiogram, the medical team in both cases were faced with the critical question of which patient gets the necessary medical care when resources are limited. In like manner, when one patient receives the appropriate care at the expense of another, medical professionals face the possibility of liability and litigation. These medical circumstances place a burden on the healthcare professionals to think and act in the best interest of the patient while still considering the ethical and legal issues they may confront as a result of their choices and actions. Medical ethics and law are always evolving as rapid advances in all areas of healthcare take place.
Braddock, Clarence, and Mark Tonelli. "Physician Aid-in-Dying: Ethical Topic in Medicine." Ethics in Medicine. University of Washington, 2009. Web. 3 March 2015.
Beauchamp, T. 1999, ‘The Beginning and End of Life’ in Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, eds Walters, L. & Beauchamp, T., Wadsworth, Belmont CA, pp. 94-98.
van Bogaert, K. D., & Ga, O. (2014, February). Ethical issues in family practice: Medical futility--the debate. Retrieved from South African Family Practice: http://www.safpj.co.za/index.php/safpj/article/viewFile/20/20
It is important that people are in control of what happens to them while under the care of their doctor, especially if they're alert and aware. A provider cannot force treatment; if a patient is unconscious, the situation changes because competency and informed consent are not present.
...d how these determinations effect a physician’s approach to various types of critically ill patients? These types of questions come in to play when one attempts to critically analyze the differences between the types of terminally ill patients and the subtle ethical/legal nuances between withholding and withdrawing treatment. According to a review by Larry Gostin and Robert Weir about Nancy Cruzan, “…courts examine the physician’s respect for the desires of the patient and the level of care administered. A rule forbidding physicians from discontinuing a treatment that could have been withheld initially will discourage doctors from attempting certain types of care and force them prematurely to allow a patient to die. Physicians must be free to exercise their best professional judgment, especially when facing the sensitive question of whether to administer treatment.”
Alan Goldman argues that medical paternalism is unjustified except in very rare cases. He states that disregarding patient autonomy, forcing patients to undergo procedures, and withholding important information regarding diagnoses and medical procedures is morally wrong. Goldman argues that it is more important to allow patients to have the ability to make autonomous decisions with their health and what treatment options if any they want to pursue. He argues that medical professionals must respect patient autonomy regardless of the results that may or may not be beneficial to a patient’s health. I will both offer an objection and support Goldman’s argument. I will
Unnoticed by the mainstream press, a disturbing study published in the Fall 2000 issue of the Cambridge Quarterly of Health Care Ethics reveals how far the futile-care movement, in reality the opening salvo in a planned campaign among medical elites to impose health-care rationing upon us, has already advanced. The authors reviewed futility policies currently in effect in 26 California hospitals. Of these, only one policy provided that "doctors should act to support the patient's life" when life-extending care is wanted. All but two of the hospital policies defined circumstances in which treatments should be considered nonobligatory even if requested by the patient or patient representative. In other words, 24 of the 26 hospitals permit doctors to unilaterally deny wanted life-supporting care.
Charlotte’s parents thought otherwise, the Ethics Advisory Committee had to get involved. The debate surrounded if the doctors were in the right to control the life of someone who were incapable of deciding themselves, or is it the parents right. The Ethics Advisory Committee, stated that the parents were superior to those of the hospital and the hospital should conduct with less painful test. Charlotte’s parents wanted the doctors to continue testing until it was determined that her life diffidently had no chance of remaining. Because, of Charlotte’s parents’ desires unfortunately caused Charlotte to die a painful death without her parents. If the patient is unable to speak for their selves, the family should be able to have some say in the medical treatment, however; if the doctors have tried everything they could do, the hospital should have final decisions whether or not the patient dies or treatment
The medical Profession recognizes that patients have a number of basic rights. These include but are not limited to the following: the right to reasonable response to his or her requests and need and needs for treatment within the hospital's capacity. The right to considerate, respectful care focused on the patient's individual needs. The right of the patient to make health care decisions, including the right to refuse treatment. The right to formulate advance directives. The right to be provided with information regarding treatment that enables the patient to make treatment decisions that reflect his or her wishes. The right to be provided upon admission to a health care facility with information about the health care provider's policies regarding advance directives, patient rights, and patient complaints. The right to participate in ethical decision making that may arise in the course of treatment. The right to be notified of any medical research or educational projects that may affect the patient's care. The right to privacy and confid...
The author describes “futile treatment” as any treatment that is administered to a patient whose medical condition does not have an encouraging outcome with only 10 % of success. It is giving treatment that sustains the life of a patient when there is not much hope of improving. The author gives the testimony of his grandfather’s terminal illness, and the patient’s wish to end all treatments. These treatments apparently kept him alive but in unbearable pain. The healthcare providers were faced with the ethical dilemma of withdrawing (stopping current treatment) vs. withholding treatment (not starting new treatment), while the author felt that everything should be attempted to save his grandfather’s life. Many times, families focus on doing
President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Defining Death: A Report on the Medical, Legal and Ethical Issues in the Determination of Death. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1981.
New York State Task Force on Life and the Law. “When Death Is Sought: Assisted
The study sheds light on the controversy around the suicide, euthanasia and "assisted death issue" that has had the government and the federal courts playing a game of tag. This controversy is a disputable area that has proved difficult in the legal realm, where no particular law restricts assisted death, and no specific law allows for it. On the one hand, there is the law that limits the provision of life-ending drugs to terminally ill patients; and on the other, no law restricts "assisting death."