Journal of Medical Ethics 43 (12):831-840 (2017)

Authors
Julian Savulescu
Oxford University
Abstract
Background Doctors sometimes encounter parents who object to prescribed treatment for their children, and request suboptimal substitutes be administered instead. Previous studies have focused on parental refusal of treatment and when this should be permitted, but the ethics of requests for suboptimal treatment has not been explored. Methods The paper consists of two parts: an empirical analysis and an ethical analysis. We performed an online survey with a sample of the general public to assess respondents’ thresholds for acceptable harm and expense resulting from parental choice, and the role that religion played in their judgement. We also identified and applied existing ethical frameworks to the case described in the survey to compare theoretical and empirical results. Results Two hundred and forty-two Mechanical Turk workers took our survey and there were 178 valid responses. Respondents’ agreement to provide treatment decreased as the risk or cost of the requested substitute increased. More than 50% of participants were prepared to provide treatment that would involve a small absolute increased risk of death for the child and a cost increase of US$<500, respectively. Religiously motivated requests were significantly more likely to be allowed. Existing ethical frameworks largely yielded ambiguous results for the case. There were clear inconsistencies between the theoretical and empirical results. Conclusion Drawing on both survey results and ethical analysis, we propose a potential model and thresholds for deciding about the permissibility of suboptimal treatment requests.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1136/medethics-2016-103461
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,159
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Toward Methodological Innovation in Empirical Ethics Research.Michael Dunn, Mark Sheehan, Tony Hope & Michael Parker - 2012 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (4):466-480.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On Settling.Robert E. Goodin - 2012 - Princeton University Press.
Clinicians' Knowledge of Informed Consent.L. Fisher-Jeffes, C. Barton & F. Finlay - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (3):181-184.
Futile Treatment, Junior Doctors and Role Virtues.R. McDougall - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (11):646-649.
Medical Mismanagement or Public Vacillation?P. N. Bamford - 1981 - Journal of Medical Ethics 7 (4):179-181.
Should Doctors Strike?John J. Park & Scott A. Murray - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (5):341-342.
Ethics Briefings.V. English - 2006 - Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (2):123-124.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-10-25

Total views
25 ( #439,851 of 2,454,809 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,241 of 2,454,809 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes