When facing decisions about withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment the physician?
When facing decisions about withholding or withdrawing life- sustaining treatment the physician should: Review with the patient the individual’s advance directive, if there is one. Otherwise, elicit the patient’s values, goals for care, and treatment preferences.
Is there an ethical difference between withholding and withdrawing treatment?
While there may be an emotional difference between not initiating an intervention at all and discontinuing it later in the course of care, there is no ethical difference between withholding and withdrawing treatment.
Do Texas parents have a right to withhold life-sustaining medical treatment?
On this issue the court reasoned that the Texas legislature had expressly given parents a right to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining medical treatment, urgently needed or not, for a child with a certifiably terminal condition, but it did not extend that right to the parents of children with nonterminal impairments, deformities, or disabilities.
When does a person decide not to use a treatment?
When a person may, or has, become dependent on such a treatment, decisions may need to be made about whether to withhold or withdraw the treatment (not start it, or stop using it). A patient who decides not to use life-sustaining treatment or who decides not to continue using a life-sustaining treatment is not “committing suicide.”
What was the law that said no one can force others to take a medical treatment they don't want?
The Fourteenth Amendment provides that no State shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." The principle that a competent person has a constitutionally protected liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment may be inferred from our prior decisions.
What are the rules for refusing to treat the patient?
As a rule of thumb, if unnecessary delays in care may cause irreparable harm, physicians can face legal liability for their refusal to treat. If you need urgent medical attention, and a doctor refuses to treat you, you can pursue a medical malpractice suit against the physician and/or the establishment they work for.
What was the Supreme Court's decision in Vacco v Quill?
It ruled 9-0 that a New York ban on physician-assisted suicide was constitutional, and preventing doctors from assisting their patients, even those terminally ill and/or in great pain, was a legitimate state interest that was well within the authority of the state to regulate.
Do patients have the right to refuse life sustaining treatment?
Under federal law, the Patient Self-Determination Act (PSDA) guarantees the right to refuse life sustaining treatment at the end of life.
What is it called when a patient refuses treatment?
Informed refusal is where a person has refused a recommended medical treatment based upon an understanding of the facts and implications of not following the treatment. Informed refusal is linked to the informed consent process, as a patient has a right to consent, but also may choose to refuse.
Can a hospital refuse to treat you?
A hospital cannot deny you treatment because of your age, sex, religious affiliation, and certain other characteristics. You should always seek medical attention if and when you need it. In some instances, hospitals can be held liable for injuries or deaths that result from refusing to admit or treat a patient.
What is the 1990 Patient Self Determination Act?
The Patient Self-Determination Act (PSDA) is a federal law, and compliance is mandatory. It is the purpose of this act to ensure that a patient's right to self-determination in health care decisions be communicated and protected.
Who makes decisions regarding withholding or withdrawing treatment?
When facing decisions about withholding or withdrawing life- sustaining treatment the physician should: Review with the patient the individual's advance directive, if there is one. Otherwise, elicit the patient's values, goals for care, and treatment preferences.
Who decides to stop life support?
Typically, the person the patient designated as the medical power of attorney gets to decide whether life support should remain active or not. In the event that the patient has not designated medical power of attorney to anyone, the patient's closest relative or friend receives the responsibility.
What does it mean when a patient decides not to use life-sustaining treatment?
A patient who decides not to use life-sustaining treatment or who decides not to continue using a life-sustaining treatment is not “committing suicide.”. Likewise, an agent who makes the same request on behalf of the patient is not “killing” the patient.
Can you be forced to stop using life sustaining measures?
No one can be forced to start using or keep using a life-sustaining measure they do not want. When a person may, or has, become dependent on such a treatment, decisions may need to be made about whether to withhold or withdraw the treatment (not start it, or stop using it).
What is Withheld, and Why?
In the clinical ethics section of this issue, papers by Paddy McQueen and Heidi Metres address the question of whether physicians may justifiably refuse voluntary sterilisation requests of competent women.
From Whom is it Withheld and Why?
These papers raise important questions regarding the permissibility of withholding certain kinds of medical interventions. In some cases though, ethical questions about withholding treatment pertain most saliently to the issue of from whom we are withholding medical treatment.
Request Permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
What was the Millers case?
The Millers filed a lawsuit against HCA, Inc, HCA-Hospital Corporation of America, Hospital Corporation of America, and Columbia/HCA Health Care Corporation (collect ively "HCA"), asserting that they were liable for the actions of their subsidiary hospital. Based on a negligence theory, the Millers asserted that HCA was liable for treating their daughter, Sydney Miller, without their consent, and second, for having a policy that mandated the resuscitation of newborn infants weighing more than 500 g. The Millers also asserted that HCA was directly liable for not preventing such treatment without consent. Based on the jury's findings, the trial court entered judgment in favor of the Millers in the amount of $29.4 million in past and future medical expenses, $13.5 million in punitive damages, and $17.5 million in prejudgment interest. HCA appealed.
What was the dissenting opinion of the Millers?
The dissenting opinion suggested that the doctors and medical personnel decided to resuscitate Sydney, knowing the Millers were there and could be consulted for their consent; and that the situation was not a medical emergency , allowing the physicians to proceed with treatment without the Millers' consent.
What journal did the report on the withdrawn treatment of a patient come from?
The report's findings were published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, the official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics. Researchers found that treatment was withdrawn or withheld in 37% of the cases sampled.
Is it important to protect the elderly from rash decisions?
While there will always be competing opinions on how to end someone's life with dignity, protecting the elderly from rash decisions during end-of-life care has always been a top priority in the medical community. Even if the data shows that physicians are withholding or withdrawing treatment from older patients more often than younger ones, ...
Why did Helen Steeple go to court?
Helen Steeple, who went to court in 2010 for permission to withdraw food and water from her son who was in a vegetative state for four years following a car crash, is glad of the regulation change. She believes the guidelines will make the process easier for professionals and help families avoid having to go to court.
Who endorses the guidelines for food and water?
The guidance is endorsed by the General Medical Council.
How long did Cathy Rentzenbrink's brother live in a vegetative state?
Cathy Rentzenbrink, whose brother spent eight years in a vegetative state before the courts permitted him to have all food and water withdrawn. Photograph: Peter Flude/The Guardian. Cathy Rentzenbrink, whose brother spent eight years in a vegetative state before the courts permitted him to have all food and water withdrawn.
How many pages are there in the BMA guidelines?
John Chisholm, chair of the BMA medical ethics committee, says: “The aim of medical treatment is not simply to prolong life at all costs.”. Numbering 105 pages, the guidelines are long and complicated.
Do second opinions cover brain injury?
They cover different scenarios depending on the nature of the brain injury and the clinical condition of the patient and , unless the patient is within hours or days of death, a second opinion is needed. Where the family and doctors disagree, it goes to court.