Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T18:24:26.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders: Public Policy and Patient Autonomy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2021

Extract

The issuance of do-not-resuscitate orders was one of the first dilemmas scrutinized by lawyers, health care professionals and philosophers in the field of bioethics. In 1983, the President's Commission articulated the basic principles that should guide decisions about CPR: respect for the choices of patients capable of deciding for themselves, recognition of family members as appropriate surrogates for decisionally incapable patients and the importance of an open dialogue with the physician as a predicate to informed consent.

Six years have passed since the President's Commission issued its landmark report. More than a decade of discussion and written commentary has clarified the ethical and social questions presented by resuscitation decisions. In many states, judicial decisions and legislation have addressed some of the legal uncertainties associated with do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders. Nonetheless, the gulf between recognized ethical principles and clinical practice remains broad and resistant to change. Nowhere is this gap more evident than in decisions about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for competent patients.

Type
Article

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.)