rss
J Med Ethics 2003;29:359-363 doi:10.1136/jme.29.6.359
  • Clinical ethics

Should patient consent be required to write a do not resuscitate order?

  1. P Biegler
  1. Correspondence to:
 Dr P Biegler
 Emergency Department, Sandringham Hospital, 193 Bluff Rd, Sandringham, Victoria 3191, Australia; pbieglerbigpond.net.au
  • Accepted 14 November 2002

Abstract

Consent ought to be required to withhold treatment that is in a patient’s best interests to receive. Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders are examples of best interests assessments at the end of life. Such assessments represent value judgments that cannot be validly ascertained without patient input. If patient input results in that patient dissenting to the DNR order then individual physicians are not justified in overriding such dissent. To do so would give unjustifiable primacy to the values of the individual physician. Therefore patient consent is effectively required to write a DNR order. Patient dissent to a DNR order should trigger a fair process mechanism to resolve the dispute.

Footnotes

    Responses to this article

    Register for free content

    The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

    Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.