Whether to allow the presence of family members during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) has been a highly contentious topic in recent years. Even though a great deal of evidence and professional guidelines support the option of family presence during resuscitation (FPDR), many healthcare professionals still oppose it. One of the main arguments espoused by the latter is that family members should not be allowed for the sake of the patient's best interests, whether it is to increase his chances of survival, respect his privacy or leave his family with a last positive impression of him. In this paper, we examine the issue of FPDR from the patient's point of view. Since the patient requires CPR, he is invariably unconscious and therefore incompetent. We discuss the Autonomy Principle and the Three-Tiered process for surrogate decision making, as well as the Beneficence Principle and show that these are limited in providing us with an adequate tool for decision making in this particular case. Rather, we rely on a novel principle (or, rather, a novel specification of an existing principle) and a novel integrated model for surrogate decision making. We show that this model is more satisfactory in taking the patient's true wishes under consideration and encourages a joint decision making process by all parties involved.
Lederman, Z., Garasic, M., & Piperberg, M. (2014). Family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Who should decide?. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 40(5), 315-319 [10.1136/medethics-2012-100715].
|Titolo:||Family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Who should decide?|
|Data di pubblicazione:||2014|
|Citazione:||Lederman, Z., Garasic, M., & Piperberg, M. (2014). Family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Who should decide?. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 40(5), 315-319 [10.1136/medethics-2012-100715].|
|Appare nelle tipologie:||1.1 Articolo in rivista|