Advertisement
Research Article| Volume 2, ISSUE 1, P41-51, January 1986

Patient Autonomy, Informed Consent, and the Reality of Critical Care

  • Stuart J. Youngner
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author: Hanna Pavilion, 2040 Abington Road, Cleveland, Ohio 44106
    Affiliations
    Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Medicine, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio
    Search for articles by this author
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-0704(18)30623-7
Patient Autonomy, Informed Consent, and the Reality of Critical Care
Previous ArticleAutonomy in the Intensive Care Unit: The Refusal of Treatment
Next ArticleEncouraging Dialogue and Autonomy in the Burn Intensive Care Unit
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.
      The realities of serious illness and critical care environments often complicate our efforts to evaluate treatment refusal according to the doctrine of informed consent. However, health professionals must strive to use informed consent as the ultimate standard for both treatment and nontreatment decisions, by making continual efforts to communicate with patients, share information, and enhance their sense of autonomy and control.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribers receive full online access to your subscription and archive of back issues up to and including 2002.

      Content published before 2002 is available via pay-per-view purchase only.

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Critical Care Clinics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Register: Create an account
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Appelbaum P.S.
        • Roth L.H.
        Clinical issues in the assessment of competency.
        Am. J. Psychiatry. 1981; 138: 1462-1467
        • Beauchamp T.L.
        • Childress J.F.
        Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford University Press, New York1983
        • Bedell S.E.
        • Delbanco T.L.
        • Cook E.F.
        • et al.
        Survival after cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the hospital.
        N. Engl. J. Med. 1983; 309: 569-576
        • Burt R.A.
        Taking Care of Strangers. 1979;
        • Cullen D.J.
        • Civetta J.M.
        • Briggs B.A.
        • et al.
        Therapeutic intervention scoring system: A method for quantitative comparison of patient care.
        Crit. Care Med. 1974; 2: 57-60
        • Dworkin G.
        Paternalism.
        The Monist. 1972; 56: 64-84
        • Feinberg J.
        Legal paternalism.
        Can. J. Philosophy. 1971; 1: 105-124
        • Jackson D.L.
        • Youngner S.
        Patient autonomy and “death with dignity.”.
        N. Engl. J. Med. 1979; 301: 404-408
        • Knaus W.A.
        • Zimmerman J.E.
        • Wagner D.P.
        • et al.
        APACHE-acute physiology and chronic health evaluation: A physiologically based classification system.
        Crit. Care Med. 1981; 9: 591-597
        • Meisel A.
        • Roth L.H.
        • Lidz C.W.
        Toward a model of the legal doctrine of informed consent.
        Am. J. Psychiatry. 1977; 134: 285-289
        • Mill J.S.
        On Liberty. Liberal Arts Press, New York1956
        • Miller B.L.
        Autonomy and the refusal of lifesaving treatment.
        Hastings Ctr. Rep. 1981; 11: 22-28
      13. President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research: Deciding to Forego Life-Sustaining Treatment. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C1983
      14. Report of the Medical Consultants on the Diagnosis of Death to the President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research: Guidelines for the determination of death.
        J.A.M.A. 1981; 246: 2184-2186
        • Roth L.H.
        • Meisel A.
        • Lidz C.W.
        Tests of competency to consent to treatment.
        Am. J. Psychiatry. 1977; 134: 279-284
        • Wanzer S.H.
        • Adelstein S.J.
        • Cranford R.E.
        • et al.
        The physician’s responsibility toward hopelessly ill patients.
        N. Engl. J. Med. 1984; 310: 955-959
        • Youngner S.J.
        • Coulton C.
        • Welton R.
        • et al.
        ICU visiting policies.
        Crit. Care Med. 1984; 12: 606-608
        • Youngner S.J.
        • Jackson D.L.
        • Ruddick W.
        Family wishes and patient autonomy.
        Commentary. Hastings Ctr. Rep. 1980; 10: 21-22

      Article info

      Identification

      DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-0704(18)30623-7

      Copyright

      © 1986 Elsevier Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      ScienceDirect

      Access this article on ScienceDirect

      The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.


      We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. To update your cookie settings, please visit the Cookie Preference Center for this site.
      Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties.


      RELX