Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:12:18.669Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ethics Committees and Due Process

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2021

Extract

Susan Wolf, in an important article on hospital or institutional ethics committees (IECs) and due process, writes:

Ethics committees are in a due process wasteland. There is no indication that committees regularly offer patients any of the basic procedural protections such as notice, an opportunity to be heard, a chance to confront those in opposition, receipt of a written determination and a statement of reasons, and an opportunity to challenge that determination. Ethics corninittees may seek the decisive power of the Adjudicatory Model, while using the process of the Consultation Model. This is the worst of both worlds—the committee wields great influence over the treatment decision but accords no protection for the patient's rights.

There are few data upon which to draw to disagree with Wolf's first claim about a due process “wasteland.” I suspect that it is mostly true, although one can observe, as I do, that Susan Wolf has omitted a great deal of evolution concerning ethics consultation in her article.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Wolf, Susan M., “Ethics Committees and Due Process: Nesting Rights in a Community of Caring,” Maryland Law Review 50:798858, 1991.Google Scholar
Hoffman, Diane E., “Regulating Ethics Committees in Health Care Institutions—Is it Time?” Maryland haw Review 50:746797, 1991, at note 109, p. 765.Google Scholar
Fletcher, John C., “The Bioethics Movement and Hospital Ethics Committees,” Maryland Law Review 50:859891, 1991.Google Scholar