1
|
Abstract
Over the course of the last half-century, intensive care units have been the setting for many ethical and legal debates in medicine. This article outlines 3 important domains that lie at the intersection of critical care, palliative care, ethics, and the law: withholding and withdrawal of potentially life-sustaining therapies, making decisions for critically ill patients who lack decision-making capacity, and approaching cases of perceived futility when patients and families still request everything that is medically possible. Important principles and precedents that underlie our understanding of how nurses should approach critically ill patients are reviewed.
Collapse
|
3
|
Abstract
Parents generally have the right to make medical decisions for their children. This right can be challenged when the parents' decision seems to go against the child's interests. The toughest such decisions are for a child who will survive with physical and neurocognitive impairments. We discuss a case of a 5-year-old boy who suffered a spinal injury as a result of a motor vehicle accident and whose father requests discontinuation of life support. Many experts recommend a "trial of therapy" to clarify both prognosis and quality of life. The key ethical question, then, is not whether to postpone a decision to forego mechanical ventilation. Instead, the key question is how long to wait. Parents should be allowed time to see what life will be like for themselves and for their child. Most of the time, life turns out better than they might have imagined. Comments are provided by 2 pediatric intensivists, Drs William Novotny and Ronald Perkin of East Carolina University, and by a specialist in rehabilitation, Dr Debjani Mukherjee of the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William E Novotny
- Department of Pediatrics, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina
| | - Ronald M Perkin
- Department of Pediatrics, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina
| | - Debjani Mukherjee
- Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois; Donnelley Ethics Program, Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; and
| | - John D Lantos
- University of Missouri at Kansas City and Children's Mercy Hospital, Kansas City, Missouri
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bruce CR, Allen NG, Fahy BN, Gordon HL, Suarez EE, Bruckner BA. Challenges in deactivating a total artificial heart for a patient with capacity. Chest 2014; 145:625-631. [PMID: 24590023 DOI: 10.1378/chest.13-1103] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/01/2022] Open
Abstract
The use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices has increased sixfold since 2006. Although there is an established legal and ethical consensus that patients have the right to withdraw and withhold life-sustaining interventions when burdens exceed benefits, this consensus arose prior to the widespread use of MCS technology and is not uniformly accepted in these cases. There are unique ethical and clinical considerations regarding MCS deactivation. Our center recently encountered the challenge of an awake and functionally improving patient with a total artificial heart (TAH) who requested its deactivation. We present a narrative description of this case with discussion of the following questions: (1) Is it ethically permissible to deactivate this particular device, the TAH? (2) Are there any particular factors in this case that are ethical contraindications to proceeding with deactivation? (3) What are the specific processes necessary to ensure a compassionate and respectful deactivation? (4) What proactive practices could have been implemented to lessen the intensity of this case's challenges? We close with a list of recommendations for managing similar cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Courtenay R Bruce
- Center for Medical Ethics & Health Policy, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX; Methodist Hospital System, The Methodist Hospital System Ethics Program, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX.
| | - Nathan G Allen
- Center for Medical Ethics & Health Policy, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX; Section of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX; Methodist Hospital System, The Methodist Hospital System Ethics Program, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX
| | - Bridget N Fahy
- Center for Medical Ethics & Health Policy, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX; Methodist Hospital System, The Methodist Hospital System Ethics Program, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX; Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, Methodist Hospital, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX; Division of Palliative Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX
| | - Harvey L Gordon
- Center for Medical Ethics & Health Policy, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX; Methodist Hospital System, The Methodist Hospital System Ethics Program, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX
| | - Erik E Suarez
- Center for Medical Ethics & Health Policy, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX; Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center and JC Walter Jr Transplant Center, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX
| | - Brian A Bruckner
- Center for Medical Ethics & Health Policy, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX; Texas Heart Institute, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Bruce CR, Brody B, Majumder MA. Ethical dilemmas surrounding the use of ventricular assist devices in supporting patients with end-stage organ dysfunction. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J 2013; 9:11-4. [PMID: 23518898 DOI: 10.14797/mdcj-9-1-11] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Successful practice of cardiovascular medicine requires familiarity with the complex ethical issues that accompany therapeutic innovation and diffusion. Even as technologies transition from experimental to standard care, challenges remain. Mechanical circulatory support devices, for instance, are increasingly conceptualized as conventional therapies. Despite this, or perhaps because of it, the ethical issues surrounding the use of these devices in patients with end-stage organ dysfunction are becoming increasingly apparent. In this paper, we provide an introduction to ethical considerations related to the use of ventricular assist devices (VADs) in end-stage organ failure, focusing on three stages or decision points: initiation, continued use, and deactivation. Our goal is not to exhaustively resolve these dilemmas but to illustrate how ethical considerations relate to decision making.
Collapse
|