![]() Until that occurs, it does not matter how providers define futility. Instead of an inability to maintain vital signs, futility must be expanded to include irreversible multiple organ system failure. The only way to change this mandate is to change the definition of futility. ![]() We are obliged to provide them because they are not 'futile' by the strict definition, and if a treatment is not futile by the strict definition then it is ethically and even legally mandated if patient or surrogate desires it. Surrogates feel that these systems can prolong vital signs during the search for a miracle long shot cure. So, we take the potential for unexpected recovery into account in our definitions of 'futility'. If the patient is dead, nothing is possible. As long as 'life' is supported, anything is possible. As far as they go, these treatments 'effectively' support open-ended hope goals even in the face of convincing evidence to the contrary. However, the addition of 'life support' to divert a death spiral is technically effective in maintaining 'life', as defined by stable vital signs. Physicians are not required to drill holes in crania to relieve headaches, even if demanded, because it does not work. The current working definition of medical futility is a treatment plan that does not achieve its desired objective. The entire world loves the unexpected survivor, especially after long lines of experts previously have forecasted inevitable demise.Īccordingly, the urban legend of the 'long shot survivor' figures into our definitions of futility. The chances of recovery are matters of opinion that are steeped in emotion and media manipulation. If they choose to equate stable vital signs with sapient life, then physicians are not empowered to question the whys and wherefores thereof. Health care consumers are granted broad powers of choice in health care options. There is no question that critical care can maintain 'life' almost indefinitely, and this fact is well known to the public. although mechanical ventilation may prolong life it would not correct the underlying illness'. The key statement in the scenario under consideration is that '. Pro: Yes, under the current rules, life support must be given regardless of prognosis
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |