Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T13:52:04.281Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ethics Committees at Work: A Different Kind of “Prisoner's Dilemma”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2009

Lawrence J. Schneiderman
Affiliation:
A professor in the Departments of Family and Preventive Medicine and Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego.
Nancy S. Jecker
Affiliation:
Associate professor in the Department of Medical History and Ethics, Department of Philosophy, and School of Law at the University of Washington, Seattle.
Christine Rozance
Affiliation:
An Assistant Professor of Community and International Health at the University of California, Davis, School of Medicine. She is Chairperson of the U.C. David Medical Center Hospital Bioethics Consultation Committee.
Arlene Judith Klotzko
Affiliation:
A Visiting Research Fellow at King's College Centre of Medical Law and Ethics, London.
Birgit Friedl
Affiliation:
A Lecturer in German Law at King's College School of Law and The London School of Economics, London.

Extract

A referral was made to our Cardiac Transplant Program for a patient who was in the New Jersey Prison System. The Medical Director of the New Jersey Department of Corrections called regarding a 39-year-old inmate who was being treated in a New Jersey hospital that has a unit for prisoners from a nearby cor- rectional facility. The referring physician described the patient to our Medical Director of heart transplantation as a “murderer” who had been incarcerated since 1987 and sentenced to prison for 30 years without eligibility for parole before completion of his 30-year sentence. The patient was being treated in the CCU of the facility and according to preliminary studies, was suffering from a possible dilated cardiomyopathy. There was evidence of a prior cerebrovascular accident (etiology unknown) with a dense hemiplegia of the left side. The patient was alert but unable to care for himself. There were a number of specific tests necessary to evaluate the patient's candidacy for heart transplantation before actually placing him-on a waiting list. However, the transplant director was uncertain about having the patient brought to our facility for further testing and called some members of the Transplant Selection Committee team to discuss the case.

Type
Departments and Columns
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

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. Should a criminal receive a heart transplant? Medical justice vs. societal justice. Theoretical Medicine [In press].Google Scholar

2. Kaplan, RM. Quality of life assessment. In: Karoly, P, Ed. Measurement Strategies in Health Psychology. New York: Wiley, 1985:115–46.Google Scholar

3. Beauchamp, TL, Childress, JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 2nd ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 1983:1985.Google Scholar

4. Alexander, S. They decide who lives, who dies. Life Magazine 1962:11 9:102–25.Google Scholar

5. Sandel, MJ. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1982:135–46.Google Scholar

6. Rawls, J. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1971: 1722.Google Scholar

7. Morreim, EH. Fiscal scarcity and the inevitability of bedside budget balancing. Archives of Internal Medicine 1989;149:1012–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

8. Morreim, EH. Cost containment: challenging fidelity and justice. Hastings Center Report 1988;18:20–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar