The judicial role in life-sustaining medical treatment decisions.
Although there has been speculation regarding the pervasiveness and nature of judicial decisions regarding life-sustaining medical treatment (LSMT), no attempt has been made to empirically assess their prevalence or the issues they address. An exploratory study utilizing a mail survey of a nationwid...
| Publicado en: | Issues in Law & Medicine Vol. 7; no. 1; pp. 53 - 54 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | research Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Issues in Law & Medicine
Summer91
|
| 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=106101874&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 106101874 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 87568160 ILM jtl: Issues in Law & Medicine issn: 87568160 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Summer91 vid: 7 iid: 1 pid: 1368 pub: Issues in Law & Medicine place: Terre Haute, Indiana artinfo: ui: 106101874 106101874 2009470549 NLM1856072 106101874 ppf: 53 ppct: 1 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: T tig: atl: The judicial role in life-sustaining medical treatment decisions. aug: au: Hafemeister TL Keilitz I sug: subj: Euthanasia, Passive Jurisprudence Life Support Care Legislation and Jurisprudence Questionnaires United States Human ab: Although there has been speculation regarding the pervasiveness and nature of judicial decisions regarding life-sustaining medical treatment (LSMT), no attempt has been made to empirically assess their prevalence or the issues they address. An exploratory study utilizing a mail survey of a nationwide random sample (N = 905) of state trial court judges was conducted to provide initial information regarding this decision-making process. Twenty-two percent of the responding judges had heard at least one LSMT case, and judicial review did not appear endemic to particular states. The number of judges hearing LSMT cases dropped from 1975 to 1981 but has increased since then. Three major issues predominate: patient competency, appointment of a surrogate decisionmaker, and resolution of the ultimate issue of forgoing LSMT. Relatively few cases either contested a prior directive's validity or involved imposing sanctions for instituting or forgoing LSMT. Although subject to different interpretations, the results suggest the courts are having a significant impact on certain aspects of the LSMT decision-making process. However, the infrequency with which any one judge is called upon to make an LSMT decision causes concern about the judiciary's ability to respond in a timely and appropriate manner. With their potential for a profound effect on the actions of health care providers, greater attention to this decision-making process is warranted. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|