scholarly journals Withholding or withdrawing treatment and palliative treatment hastening death: The real reason why doctors are not held legally liable for murder

2013 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. 102
Author(s):  
David Jan McQuoid-Mason
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Treatment ◽  
Withdrawing Treatment ◽  
The Real ◽  
Withholding Or Withdrawing Treatment

Withholding or withdrawing treatment in the seriously or terminally ill

2012 ◽  
pp. 331-343
Author(s):  
Kerry J. Breen ◽  
Stephen M. Cordner ◽  
Colin J. H. Thomson ◽  
Vernon D. Plueckhahn
Keyword(s):  
Terminally Ill ◽  
Withdrawing Treatment ◽  
Withholding Or Withdrawing Treatment

Self-Inflicted Gunshot Wound/Self-Reported No Code Status: The Doctor’s Dilemma

2020 ◽  
pp. 65-74
Author(s):  
Raquel M. Schears ◽  
Markayle R. Schears
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
Advance Directive ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Gunshot Wound ◽  
Moral Distress ◽  
Withdrawing Treatment ◽  
Code Status ◽  
Good Outcome ◽  
Withholding Or Withdrawing Treatment

Suicidal ideation and attempted suicide are important presenting complaints in the emergency department (ED). The juxtaposition of a self-inflicted gunshot wound and self-reported no code status may serve to amplify the moral distress of attending emergency providers. Imagine caring for a terminal yet capable patient, who independently attempts suicide unsuccessfully and is brought to the ED with an advance directive (AD) requesting no treatment. The exceptional consideration in this suicidal context is whether the treatment can be effective. In a case with a very low likelihood that any intervention could produce a good outcome, clinical judgment becomes the basis for withholding or withdrawing treatment, not the AD.

An Alternative Perspective on Rationing Ventilators

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (7) ◽  
pp. 5-6
Author(s):  
Tadeusz Pacholczyk ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Clinical Status ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Withdrawing Treatment ◽  
Medical Decisions ◽  
Psychological Strain ◽  
Exclusion Criteria ◽  
Scarce Resources ◽  
Alternative Perspective ◽  
Withholding Or Withdrawing Treatment

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in discussion on how to allocate scarce medical resources such as ventilators. Some bioethicists have suggested that difficult determinations about withholding or withdrawing treatment should be made by triage officers or committees to alleviate the psychological strain on frontline clinicians. However, this raises concerns about shifting important personal medical decisions away from physicians and their patients. According to the principle of subsidiarity, frontline clinicians, together with their patients, should be making these decisions, with ethics committees or triage committees serving only in an advisory capacity. Several ethical principles can help health care professionals allocate scarce resources. These include basing exclusion criteria on clinical status rather than nonmedical characteristics; randomizing treatment for clinically similar patients; obtaining free and informed consent when considering the withdrawal of treatment, even in situations where treatment is possibly futile; and emphasizing quality palliative care for all patients.

scholarly journals Ethical Dilemmas in Postnatal Treatment of Severe Congenital Hydrocephalus

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 84-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
DOMINIC WILKINSON
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Dilemmas ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Congenital Hydrocephalus ◽  
Limited Resources ◽  
Withdrawing Treatment ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Postnatal Treatment ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Withholding Or Withdrawing Treatment

Abstract:Severe congenital hydrocephalus manifests as accumulation of a large amount of excess fluid in the brain. It is a paradigmatic example of a condition in which diagnosis is relatively straightforward and long-term survival is usually associated with severe disability. It might be thought that, should parents agree, palliative care and limitation of treatment would be clearly permissible on the basis of the best interests of the infant. However, severe congenital hydrocephalus illustrates some of the neuroethical challenges in pediatrics. The permissibility of withholding or withdrawing treatment is limited by uncertainty in prognosis and the possibility of “palliative harm.” Conversely, although there are some situations in which treatment is contrary to the interests of the child, or unreasonable on the grounds of limited resources, acute surgical treatment of hydrocephalus rarely falls into that category.

scholarly journals Intentionally hastening death by withholding or withdrawing treatment

2006 ◽  
Vol 118 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 322-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Bosshard ◽  
Susanne Fischer ◽  
Agnes van der Heide ◽  
Guido Miccinesi ◽  
Karin Faisst
Keyword(s):  
Withdrawing Treatment ◽  
Withholding Or Withdrawing Treatment
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document