Show simple item record

dc.creatorLuce, John M.en
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T19:00:07Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T19:00:07Zen
dc.date.created1995-04en
dc.date.issued1995-04en
dc.identifier10.1097/00003246-199504000-00027en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationCritical Care Medicine. 1995 Apr; 23(4): 760-766.en
dc.identifier.issn0090-3493en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Physicians+Do+Not+Have+a+Responsibility+to+Provide+Futile+Or+unreasonable+Care+If+a+Patient+or+Family+Insists&title=Critical+Care+Medicine.++&volume=23&issue=4&pages=760-766&date=1995&au=Luce,+John+M.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00003246-199504000-00027en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/751162en
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: This article was written to argue that physicians are not ethically obligated to provide care which they consider futile, unreasonable, or both, either voluntarily or in response to patient or surrogate demands. DATA SOURCES: Data used to prepare this article were drawn from published articles, including original investigations, position papers and editorials in the author's personal files. STUDY SELECTION: Articles were selected for their relevance to the subjects of medical ethics, the concepts of futility and medical reasonableness, case law, and healthcare reform. DATA EXTRACTION: The author extracted all applicable data. DATA SYNTHESIS: Physicians may feel obligated to provide care in all clinical circumstances due to the single master view of medicine and the ethical principle of autonomy. However, care may be considered futile according to several definitions of that word, including that which describes futile treatment as something that does not benefit the patient as a whole. Furthermore, care may be considered unreasonable if it is excessive and not generally agreed upon. Physician refusal to provide futile or unreasonable care is supported by the ethical principles of nonmaleficence, beneficence, and distributive justice. The last principle is particularly relevant in the current climate of healthcare reform. CONCLUSIONS: Although the issue of physician refusal of requested care has not been resolved by case law or legal statute, it is supported by compelling ethical principles. Physicians are not ethically required to provide futile or unreasonable care, especially to patients who are brain dead, vegetative, critically or terminally ill with little chance of recovery, and unlikely to benefit from cardiopulmonary resuscitation.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:MEDKIE/95228355en
dc.subjectAllowing to Dieen
dc.subjectAutonomyen
dc.subjectBeneficenceen
dc.subjectBrainen
dc.subjectBrain Deathen
dc.subjectConsensusen
dc.subjectDeathen
dc.subjectDecision Makingen
dc.subjectEconomicsen
dc.subjectEthicsen
dc.subjectFamily Membersen
dc.subjectFutilityen
dc.subjectJusticeen
dc.subjectLawen
dc.subjectLifeen
dc.subjectMedical Ethicsen
dc.subjectMedicineen
dc.subjectMoral Obligationsen
dc.subjectMoral Policyen
dc.subjectNonmaleficenceen
dc.subjectObligations to Societyen
dc.subjectPatientsen
dc.subjectPersistent Vegetative Stateen
dc.subjectPhysician's Roleen
dc.subjectPhysiciansen
dc.subjectProlongation of Lifeen
dc.subjectPublic Policyen
dc.subjectQuality of Lifeen
dc.subjectResource Allocationen
dc.subjectResuscitationen
dc.subjectTerminally Illen
dc.subjectWithholding Treatmenten
dc.titlePhysicians Do Not Have a Responsibility to Provide Futile or Unreasonable Care if a Patient or Family Insistsen
dc.provenanceDigital citation created by the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature at Georgetown University for the BIOETHICSLINE database, part of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics' Bioethics Information Retrieval Project funded by the United States National Library of Medicine.en
dc.provenanceDigital citation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named NBIO hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection BioethicsLine hosted by Georgetown University.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2022 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885