Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T16:53:38.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Medical Futility: The Duty Not to Treat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2009

Nancy S. Jecker  and
Lawrence J. Schneiderman
Nancy S. Jecker
Affiliation:
University of Washington's, Department of Medical History and Ethics, and Adjunct Assistant Professor at the University of Washington School of Law
Lawrence J. Schneiderman
Affiliation:
University of California-San Diego, Departments of Community and Family Medicine and Medicine
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Partly because physicians can “never say never,” partly because of the seduction of modern technology, and partly out of misplaced fear of litigation, physicians have increasingly shown a tendency to undertake treatments that have no realistic expectation of success. For this reason, we have articulated common sense criteria for medical futility. If a treatment can be shown not to have worked in the last 100 cases, we propose that it be regarded as medically futile. Also, if the treatment fails to restore consciousness or alleviate total dependence on intensive care, we propose such treatment be judged futile. This definition provides clear end points and encourages the profession to review data from the past and perform, prospective clinical studies that not only report treatments that work but also treatments that do not work. We have also argued that, in a variety of settings, physicians have no ordinary ethical obligation to offer futile interventions (Schneiderman et al. unpublished). Although physicians should inform, and discuss all decisions to withhold or withdraw medical treatments with patients, they need not obtain the patient's permission to desist from futile interventions.

Type
Special Section: Medical Futility: Demands, Duties, and Dilemmas
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , Spring 1993 , pp. 151 - 159
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. . Schneiderman, LJ, Jecker, NS, Jonsen, AR. Medical futility: its meaning and ethical implications. Annals of Internal Medicine 1990;112:949–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

2. Jecker, NS. Knowing when to stop: the limits of medicine. Hastings Center Report 1991;21(3):5–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

3. Jecker, NS, Schneiderman, LJ. Futility and rationing. American Journal of Medicine 1992;92:189–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

4. Jecker, NS, Pearlman, RA. Medical futility: who decides? Archives of Internal Medicine 1992;152:1140–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

5. Jecker, NS, Schneiderman, LJ. Ceasing futile resuscitation in the field: ethical considerations. Archives of Internal Medicine 1992;152:2392–2397.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

6. Schneiderman, LJ, Jecker, NS. Futility in practice. Archives of Internal Medicine [in press]Google Scholar.

7. Task Force on Ethics of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Consensus report on the ethics of foregoing life-sustaining treatments in the critically ill. Critical Care Medicine 1990;18:1435–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

8. American Thoracic Society, Bioethics Task Force. Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining therapy. Annals of Internal Medicine 1991;115:478–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9. President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Deciding to forego life-sustaining treatments. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1983Google Scholar.

10. Brody, H, Tomlinson, T. Futility and the ethics of resuscitation. Journal of the American Medical Association 1990;264:1276–80.Google Scholar

11. See note 9. President's Commission. 1983:44.

12. See note 9. President's Commission. 1983:44.

13. The Hastings Center. Guidelines on the Termination of Life-Sustaining Treatment and the Care of the Dying. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1987:19.Google Scholar

14. American Medical Association, Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. Guidelines on the ap- propriate use of do-not-resuscitate orders. Journal of the American Medical Association 1991;265:1868–71, at 1870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15. See note 8. American Thoracic Society. 1991;115:481Google Scholar.

16. See note 7. Society of Critical Care Medicine. 1990;18:1436Google Scholar.

17. Veatch, RM, Spicer, CM. Medically futile care: the role of the physician in setting limits. American Journal of Law and Medicine 1992;18:15–36.Google ScholarPubMed

18. Truog, RD, Brett, AS, Frader, J. The problem with futility. New England Journal of Medicine 1992;326:1560–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

19. Angell, M. The case of Helga Wanglie: a new kind of “right to die” case. New England Journal of Medicine 1991;325:511–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

20. Jecker, NS, Pearlman, RA. Medical futility, reply to Letter to the Editor. Archives of Internal Medicine [in press]Google Scholar.

21. Tomlinson, T, Brody, H. Ethics and communication in do-not-resuscitate orders. New England Jour- nal of Medicine 1988;318:43–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

22. See note 3. Jecker, Schneiderman. 1992;92:189–96Google Scholar.