Treatment Decisions for Terminally Ill Patients: Physicians' Legal Defensiveness and Knowledge of Medical Law

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Wanzer, et al., have noted that “all too frequently, physicians are reluctant to withdraw aggressive treatment from hopelessly ill patients, despite clear legal precedent.” Our collective clinical experience confirms that this reluctance persists among some physicians. In this study, we investigated physicians’ attitudes, knowledge, and reported practices regarding the effects of perceived legal constraints on the abatement of life-sustaining treatment from patients who are clearly dying. A factor in assessing these issues is the concept of defensive medicine-that is, the perception that doctors are being forced to order every possible laboratory test and second opinion, or to continue providing non-beneficial life-sustaining treatment, solely to protect themselves from future legal claims. This perception appears widespread among practicing physicians. However, we believe that defensive medicine represents only part of a complex constellation of factors that comprise physicians’ reluctance to abate treatment. This phenomenon encompasses medical, ethical, legal, social, psychological, and spiritual factors interacting in ways that are not fully understood.