Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and the Presumption of Informed Consent

The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 20 (4):683-693 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation is the default response for persons who suffer cardiac or pulmonary arrest, except in cases in which there exists a do-not-resuscitate order. This default mindset is based on the rule of rescue and the ethical principle of beneficence. However, due to the lack of efficacy and the high risk of potential harm inherent in CPR, this procedure should not be the default intervention for cardiac or pulmonary arrest. Although CPR is a lifesaving medical intervention, it has limited positive results and the potential for multiple harmful consequences. Given the limited potential of CPR as a medical procedure, clinicians and patients must be educated regarding its limited potential, and procedures must be developed to help determine when it is appropriate as a medical intervention.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,642

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

When Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Becomes Harmful.Marissa L. Mullins - 2017 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 17 (2):235-245.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-04-07

Downloads
2 (#1,450,151)

6 months
11 (#1,140,922)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references