Involving patients in do not resuscitate (DNR) decisions: an old issue raising its ugly head.
- 1 September 1991
- journal article
- Published by BMJ in Journal of Medical Ethics
- Vol. 17 (3) , 156-160
- https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.17.3.156
Abstract
A recent paper in this journal (1) suggests that involving terminally ill patients in choices concerned with Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) produces 'psychological pain' and therefore is ill-advised. Such a claim rests on anecdotal observations made by the authors. In this paper I suggest that drawing conclusions in ethics, no less than in science, requires a rigorous framework and cannot be relegated to personal observation of a few cases. The paper concludes by suggesting that patients, if we acknowledge their valid interest in making their own choices, must themselves be allowed to make a prior choice about choosing. Those who may not wish to choose may properly be relieved of this burden and may allow another to choose for them. Routinely allowing others to make choices for competent adults, however, is likely to decrease communication with the dying patient and to introduce an atmosphere of suspicion and fear and to exclude the competent patient from his/her rightful place in the community.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Do not resuscitate decisions: discussions with patients.Journal of Medical Ethics, 1989
- Treatment Decisions in the Mentally ImpairedNew England Journal of Medicine, 1987
- Must We Always Use CPR?New England Journal of Medicine, 1987
- Patient, family, physician: agreement, disagreement, and resolution.1986
- Survival after Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in the HospitalNew England Journal of Medicine, 1983
- CLINICAL CONFERENCES* : Quality-of-life Considerations in Geriatric CareJournal of the American Geriatrics Society, 1983