Interesting ethics scenario

[PeepshowJohnny]

---

Members do not see this ad.

There is then the question of whether or not it's "life or limb saving treatment," if the treatment may not produce the desired results. In this situation, it appears that the parents DO wish to seek out life-saving treatment - it's just that this treatment is not, shall we say, going to be in the category of evidence-based medicine.

Well, that's when it falls into the criteria of "What would the average Joe Schmoe type guy think?" because that's what we're just going to have to assume a child is going to grow into. And that's up for a judge or some arbitrating body to decide.

In this case, I'd go 9 to 1 odds they're going to choose in favor of forcing the operation on the kid. Most people would agree that's a reasonable life saving measure.

Now, if the hospital was trying to force a 1/100 lifesaving chance that is going to put the kid in extreme agony if it fails, I think most people would agree most people wouldn't take that chance so they'd choose on the parents side.

 

[Terpskins99]

Well, that's when it falls into the criteria of "What would the average Joe Schmoe type guy think?" because that's what we're just going to have to assume a child is going to grow into. And that's up for a judge or some arbitrating body to decide.

Yop... well, sorta. The doctor can make the call in an emergency situation.

You're referring to the best interest standard established by Eichner v. Dillon (1981).

 

[WiscDoc]

Why are we then taught about being open minded to what our patients want? I know I'm just an M1 who knows very little, but our school seems to emphasize working with the patient and getting out of the DOCTOR IS SO MIGHTY mentality and let patients make their decisions. I know being a minor complicates things, but his parents are trying to hurt him. They are doing what they believe is right after being taught the pros and cons of either choice. Like some one said, its not like the amputation will "cure" him, it will just delay the inevitable for a couple of years, and the boy will suffer through these years due to treatment and being crippled. Why would doctors want to assume such a responsibility, let the parents decide and deal with the results later.

Disclaimer: I normally would encourage overriding patients/parents' decisions if it was to reject treatment or blood transfusions...etc. Its not so cut and dry in this case.