This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Rita T. Layson, MD, MA; Terrance McConnell, PhD

Arch Intern Med. 1996;156(22):2617-2620.

Abstract
Using cardiopulmonary resuscitation for cardiac or respiratory arrest unless there is an explicit do-not-resuscitate order is a policy adopted by all hospitals. Such a policy usually requires the patient's (or surrogate's) consent for a do-not-resuscitate order to be instituted. This article, however, presents the argument that consent need not always be obtained. In the case discussed, the well-being of the patient, other patients, and the health care providers all support a unilateral decision by the physician not to attempt resuscitation at the time of death. The medical community and society need to acknowledge that such cases exist and to develop policies that respect not only the interests of patients but also those of health care providers and society. Arch Intern Med.

1996;156:2617-2620

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and Moses Cone Memorial Hospital, Chapel Hill (Dr Layson), and Department of Philosophy, University of North Carolina at Greensboro (Dr McConnell).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Should patient consent be required to write a do not resuscitate order?
Biegler
J. Med. Ethics 2003;29:359-363.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Rise and Fall of the Futility Movement
Helft et al.
NEJM 2000;343:293-296.
FULL TEXT