Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
6
pubmed:dateCreated
1996-9-17
pubmed:abstractText
Dilemmas about resuscitation and life-prolonging treatment for severely compromised infants have become increasingly complex as skills in neonatal care have developed. Quality of life and resource issues necessarily influence management. Our Institute of Medical Ethics working party, on whose behalf this paper is written, recognises that the ultimate responsibility for the final decision rests with the doctor in clinical charge of the infant. However, we advocate a team approach to decision-making, emphasising the important role of parents and nurses in the process. Assessing the relative burdens and benefits can be troubling, but doctors and parents need to retain a measure of discretion; legislation which would determine action in all cases is inappropriate. Caution should be exercised in involving committees in decision-making and, where they exist, their remit should remain to advise rather than to decide. Support for families who bear the consequences of their decisions is often inadequate, and facilitating access to such services is part of the wider responsibilities of the intensive care team. The authors believe that allowing death by withholding or withdrawing treatment is legitimate, where those closely involved in the care of the infant together deem the burdens to be unacceptable without compensating benefits for the infant. As part of the process accurate and careful recording is essential.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
pubmed:keyword
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
E
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Dec
pubmed:issn
0306-6800
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
21
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
339-44
pubmed:dateRevised
2009-11-18
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Brain Diseases, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Congenital Abnormalities, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Consensus, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Decision Making, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Ethics, Medical, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Ethics Committees, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Ethics Committees, Clinical, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Euthanasia, Passive, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Humans, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Infant, Newborn, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Infant, Premature, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Infant, Very Low Birth Weight, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Judicial Role, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Life Support Care, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Parental Consent, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Patient Advocacy, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Patient Care Team, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Professional-Family Relations, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Quality of Life, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Resource Allocation, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Resuscitation Orders, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Risk Assessment, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Stress, Psychological, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-United States, pubmed-meshheading:8778457-Withholding Treatment
pubmed:year
1995
pubmed:articleTitle
Prolonging life and allowing death: infants.
pubmed:affiliation
Aberdeen University, Edinburgh.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article