A Costly Separation Between Withdrawing and Withholding Treatment in Intensive Care.

ABSTRACT Ethical analyses, professional guidelines and legal decisions support the equivalence thesis for life-sustaining treatment: if it is ethical to withhold treatment, it would be ethical to withdraw the same treatment. In this paper we explore reasons why the majority of medical professionals...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Bioethics Vol. 28; no. 3; pp. 127 - 138
Autores principales: Wilkinson, Dominic, Savulescu, Julian
Formato: Journal Article
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Mar2014
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=104031022&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 104031022
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        02699702
        6PJ
      jtl: Bioethics
      issn: 02699702
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Mar2014
      vid: 28
      iid: 3
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
      place: Malden, Massachusetts
    artinfo:
      ui:
        104031022
        2012477980
        10.1111/j.1467-8519.2012.01981.x
        NLM22762352
        PMC3465577
        104031022
      ppf: 127
      ppct: 11
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: A Costly Separation Between Withdrawing and Withholding Treatment in Intensive Care.
      aug:
        au:
          Wilkinson, Dominic
          Savulescu, Julian
        affil: Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide
      sug:
        subj:
          Critical Care Ethical Issues
          Refusal to Treat Ethical Issues
          Health Resource Allocation Ethical Issues
          Critical Care Economics
          Refusal to Treat Economics
          Ethics, Medical
          Resource Allocation Ethical Issues
      ab: ABSTRACT Ethical analyses, professional guidelines and legal decisions support the equivalence thesis for life-sustaining treatment: if it is ethical to withhold treatment, it would be ethical to withdraw the same treatment. In this paper we explore reasons why the majority of medical professionals disagree with the conclusions of ethical analysis. Resource allocation is considered by clinicians to be a legitimate reason to withhold but not to withdraw intensive care treatment. We analyse five arguments in favour of non-equivalence, and find only relatively weak reasons to restrict rationing to withholding treatment. On the contrary, resource allocation provides a strong argument in favour of equivalence: non-equivalence causes preventable death in critically ill patients. We outline two proposals for increasing equivalence in practice: (1) reduction of the mortality threshold for treatment withdrawal, (2) time-limited trials of intensive care. These strategies would help to move practice towards more rational treatment limitation decisions.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N