DNR in the OR
- 6 November 1991
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in JAMA
- Vol. 266 (17) , 2407-2412
- https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1991.03470170095031
Abstract
Should do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders be routinely rescinded when terminally ill patients undergo palliative surgery? If so, patients will be forced to balance the benefits of palliative surgery against the risks of unwanted resuscitation. If physicians are required to honor intraoperative DNR orders, they may feel unacceptably restrained from correcting adverse effects for which they feel responsible. This dilemma has been overlooked by DNR policies. This article argues for the permissibility of honoring intraoperative DNR orders. The patient's right to refuse treatment outweighs physicians' concerns about professional scrutiny over intraoperative deaths. Physicians' moral concerns about hastening patient death are important but may be assuaged by (1) emphasizing patients' acceptance of operative mortality risk; (2) viewing matters as analogous to surgery on Jehovah's Witnesses who refuse lifesaving transfusion; (3) viewing the patient's intraoperative death as a double effect, that is, an unintended negative effect that is linked to the performance of a good act (palliation); and (4) distinguishing this from assisted suicide. (JAMA. 1991;266:2407-2412)Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Conflicts between Patients' Wishes to Forgo Treatment and the Policies of Health Care FacilitiesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1989
- A review of the ethical and legal aspects of terminating medical careThe American Journal of Medicine, 1988
- Physical status score and trends in anesthetic complicationsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1988
- The principle of double effect and medical ethics.BMJ, 1986
- Terminating Life Support: Out of the Closet!New England Journal of Medicine, 1976
- The Role of Anesthesia in Surgical MortalityJAMA, 1961