Article Text
Special clinical ethics symposium: the case of Ms B
Grasping the nettle—what to do when patients withdraw their consent for treatment: (a clinical perspective on the case of Ms B)
Abstract
Withdrawal of active treatment is common in medical practice, especially in critical care medicine. Usually, however, it involves patients who are unable to take part in the decision making process. As the case of Ms B shows, doctors are sometimes reluctant to withdraw active treatment when the patient is awake and requesting such a course of action. In theory, having a competent patient should facilitate clinical decision making, so where does the problem arise? It is argued that latent medical paternalism may come to the surface when doctors are asked by patients to follow a course of action which is in conflict with their own perspective.
- Law and medical ethics
- end-of-life decisions
- critical medicine
- medical paternalism
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Right to refuse treatment in Turkey: a diagnosis and a slightly less than modest proposal for reform
- Withholding and withdrawing life support in critical care settings: ethical issues concerning consent
- Medical paternalism in House M.D.
- Withdrawal of treatment
- The transformation of (bio)ethics expertise in a world of ethical pluralism
- Autonomy in medical ethics after O’Neill
- Refusal rights, law and medical paternalism in Turkey
- Three arguments against prescription requirements
- The moral agency of institutions: effectively using expert nurses to support patient autonomy
- Futility has no utility in resuscitation medicine