Article Text
PDFDisorders of consciousness
CPR decision making: why Winspear needs to be challenged?
Abstract
This is a personal view about the recent high court decision around cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This opinion identifies that the judge failed to recognise the statutory role given to clinicians in identifying when a treatment is life sustaining. In failing to recognise the role of the clinician, the ruling in Winspear risks the likelihood of inappropriate CPR attempts.
- Capacity
- Legal Aspects
- Decision-making
- End-of-life
- Ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- CPR decision-making conversations in the UK: an integrative review
- Resuscitation decisions at the end of life: medical views and the juridification of practice
- Family members, ambulance clinicians and attempting CPR in the community: the ethical and legal imperative to reach collaborative consensus at speed
- Variation in local trust Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) policies: a review of 48 English healthcare trusts
- Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions for older medical inpatients: a cohort study
- Raising the issue of DNAR orders in vascular surgery patients
- When and how to discuss “do not resuscitate” decisions with patients
- Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation documentation: a quality improvement project
- Discussion and documentation of future care: a before-and-after study examining the impact of an alternative approach to recording treatment decisions on advance care planning in an acute hospital
- Making decisions to limit treatment in life-limiting and life-threatening conditions in children: a framework for practice