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

Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (6):359-363 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Consent ought to be required to withhold treatment that is in a patient’s best interests to receive. Do not resuscitate 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

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,497

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Is Consent Useful When Resuscitation Isn't?Giles R. Scofield - 1991 - Hastings Center Report 21 (6):28-36.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
44 (#496,858)

6 months
17 (#165,686)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Principles of biomedical ethics.Tom L. Beauchamp - 1989 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by James F. Childress.
Abandoning Informed Consent.Robert M. Veatch - 1995 - Hastings Center Report 25 (2):5-12.
Two concepts of liberty.Ronald Dworkin - 1991 - In Isaiah Berlin, Edna Ullmann-Margalit & Avishai Margalit (eds.), Isaiah Berlin: a celebration. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 100--109.

View all 8 references / Add more references