Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T20:47:49.732Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 14 - Advance Care Planning and End-of-Life Decision-Making

from Section 2 - Consultation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2022

By
Nancy M. P. King  and
John C. Moskop
Edited by
D. Micah Hester  and
Toby L. Schonfeld
D. Micah Hester
Affiliation:
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine
Toby L. Schonfeld
Affiliation:
National Center for Ethics in Health Care, US Department of Veterans Affairs
Get access

Summary

Mrs. Wilson’s case exemplifies one kind of disagreement about treatment near the end of life that occurs frequently in hospitals and often prompts a request for ethics consultation. There are several reasons for the frequent resort to ethics consultation in these situations. The values at stake, including freedom from suffering and disability and prolongation of life, are significant. In addition, treatment choices are often complex, offering uncertain benefits and burdens. Finally, as the long, public, and bitter legal battle over the care of Terri Schiavo made clear, Americans hold strong and divergent views about which life-sustaining treatments should, and should not, be pursued (Gostin, 2005). In this chapter, we explain that advance care planning and attention to goals of care can prevent or ameliorate much uncertainty and conflict over treatment decisions near the end of life.

Type
Chapter
Information
Guidance for Healthcare Ethics Committees , pp. 121 - 128
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

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

Compassion and Choices. (n.d.). In Your State. https://compassionandchoices.org/take-action/in-your-state/.Google Scholar
Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health. (1990). 110 S.Ct. 2841.Google Scholar
Gostin, LO (2005). Ethics, the constitution, and the dying process: The case of Theresa Marie Schiavo. Journal of the American Medical Association, 293(19): 2403–2407.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hammes, BJ, Rooney, BL, Gundrun, JD (2010). A comparative, retrospective, observational study of the prevalence, availability, and specificity of advance care plans in a county that implemented an advance care planning microsystem. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 58(7): 1249–1255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, LM (2019). Beyond cultural competence: Applying humility to clinical settings. In Oberlander, J et al., eds., The Social Medicine Reader, 3rd ed., vol. II. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 127–131.Google Scholar
Lehmann, CU, Petersen, P, Bhatia, H, Berner, ES, Goodman, KW (2019). Advance directives and code status information exchange: A consensus proposal for a minimum set of attributes. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 28(1): 178–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moskop, JC (2016). Ethics and Health Care: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization. (n.d.). Caring Connections. www.caringinfo.org/.Google Scholar
POLST: Portable Medical Orders. (n.d.). POLST State Programs. https://polst.org/state-programs/.Google Scholar
In re Quinlan (1976). 70 N.J. 10, 355 A.2d 647.Google Scholar
Wolf, SM, Berlinger, N, Jennings, B (2015). Forty years of work on end of life care – from patients’ rights to systemic reform. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(7): 678–682.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yadav, KN, Gabler, NB, Cooney, E, et al. (2017). Approximately one in three US adults completes any type of advance directive for end-of-life care. Health Affairs (Millwood), 36(7): 1244–1251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×