Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Informed Consent, and Rescue: What Provides Moral Justification for the Provision of CPR?

Journal of Clinical Ethics 30 (1):67-73 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Questions related to end-of-life decision making are common in clinical ethics and may be exceedingly difficult. Chief among these are the provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and do-not-resuscitate orders (DNRs). To better address such questions, clarity is needed on the values of medical ethics that underlie CPR and the relevant moral framework for making treatment decisions. An informed consent model is insufficient to provide justification for CPR. Instead, ethical justification for CPR rests on the rule of rescue and on substituted interest judgments. Patients’ known wishes and values are relevant, particularly in protecting them from unwanted CPR. Clinicians should rescue patients with the means at their disposal, as a prima facie moral imperative, unless there are compelling reasons to refrain. We present a moral framework for making decisions regarding CPR and DNR.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,069

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

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and the Presumption of Informed Consent.David J. Buckles - 2020 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 20 (4):683-693.
Resuscitation and senility: a study of patients' opinions.G. S. Robertson - 1993 - Journal of Medical Ethics 19 (2):104-107.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-06-14

Downloads
7 (#1,412,480)

6 months
6 (#587,779)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references