Article contents
Conflict in the Pediatric Setting: Clinical Judgment vs. Parental Autonomy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 July 2009
Extract
Over the past several decades, conflicts between physicians and patients or patient surrogates concerning continued treatment or the withdrawal of treatment have received public and legal attention. In more recent years, there have been several prominent Instances in which physicians have refused to provide treatment requested by patient surrogates because such treatment was judged to be futile. The claim that a treatment is futile has far reaching consequences. It serves to justify the withholding or withdrawal of treatment and thus, perhaps, to also justify the rationing of healthcare. It limits the autonomy of the patient or patient surrogate by reducing their participation in the decision making process.
- Type
- Special Section: Beyond Autonomy
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995
References
1. British judges cannot order doctors to treat. Hastings Center Report 1992;22(4):3–4.Google Scholar
2. See notes 1 and 3.
3. Plato, . The Republic. Conford, FM, ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1958:488a–9a.Google Scholar
4. Schneiderman, L, Jecker, NJ, Jonsen, AR. Medical futility: its meaning and ethical implications. Annals of Internal Medicine 1990;112:949–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Lantos, JD, Singer, PA, Walker, RM et al. , The illusion of futility in clinical practice. The American Journal of Medicine 1989;87:82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Veatch, R, Spicer, CM. Medically futile care: the role of the physician in setting limits. American Journal of Law and Medicine 1992;xvii(1&2):21.Google Scholar
- 5
- Cited by