The Need for an Effective Process to Resolve Conflicts Over Medical Futility: A Case Study and Analysis

Author:

Olmstead Jocelyn A.1,Dahnke Michael D.2

Affiliation:

1. Jocelyn A. Olmstead is in the online master’s of nursing-family nurse practitioner program at Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and works as a staff nurse in the emergency department at Johns Hopkins Bayview in Baltimore, Maryland.

2. Michael Dahnke is a bioethicist and adjunct instructor in the School of Nursing at the College of New Rochelle, New Rochelle, New York, and adjunct instructor in the philosophy department at the College of Staten Island, New York, New York.

Abstract

The issue of medical futility requires a well-defined process in which both sides of the dispute can be heard and a resolution reached in a fair and ethical manner. Procedural approaches to medical futility cases provide all parties involved with a process-driven framework for resolving these disputes. Medical paternalism or the belief in the absolute rightness of the medical model will not serve to resolve these disputes. Although medical futility is first determined by medicine, in order for the determination to meet legal criteria, it must be subject to review. The hope is that through a review process that meets legal criteria, the issue can be resolved without the need for court proceedings. If resolution cannot be obtained through this process, surrogates still have the right to seek court intervention. This issue is of relevance and importance in critical care nursing because of the role and position of critical care nurses, who have direct contact with patients and patients’ families, the potential for moral distress in cases of possibly futile treatment, and the expanding roles of nurses, including critical care nurses and advanced practice nurses, in management and policy development.

Publisher

AACN Publishing

Subject

Critical Care,General Medicine

Cited by 10 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3