Unlocking the Voices of Patients with Severe Brain Injury
Neuroethics 15 (1):1-15 (2022)
Abstract
This paper critically examines whether patients with severe brain injury, who can only communicate through assistive neuroimaging technologies, may permissibly participate in medical decisions. We examine this issue in the context of a unique case study from the Brain and Mind Institute at the University of Western Ontario. First, we describe how the standard approach to medical decision making might problematically exclude patients with communication impairments secondary to severe brain injury. Second, we present a modified approach to medical decision making. We argue that this approach might warrant the inclusion of some patients with severe brain injury in low-stakes decisions, or to express preferences. Third, we present a model of supported decision making to address recalcitrant uncertainty. We conclude by suggesting that the modified approach to decision making and supported decision making might allow a patient with severe brain injury to participate in some medical decisions. Our analysis is provisional and has not yet been implemented in practice. Our discussion is intended to generate further debate on approaches to enhancing autonomy in patients with profound motor and cognitive impairments.Author Profiles
My notes
Similar books and articles
Traumatic Brain Injury: An Objective Model of Consent. [REVIEW]S. Honeybul, K. M. Ho & G. R. Gillett - 2013 - Neuroethics 7 (1):11-18.
Ethical considerations in functional magnetic resonance imaging research in acutely comatose patients.Charles Weijer, Tommaso Bruni, Teneille Gofton, G. Bryan Young, Loretta Norton, Andrew Peterson & Adrian M. Owen - 2015 - Brain:0-0.
Distinct molecular phenotypes of direct vs indirect ARDS in single-center and multicenter studies.C. S. Calfee, D. R. Janz, G. R. Bernard, A. K. May, K. N. Kangelaris, M. A. Matthay & L. B. Ware - unknown
A Critical Analysis of Joseph Fins’ Mosaic Decisionmaking: A Response to “Mosaic Decisionmaking and Reemergent Agency after Severe Brain Injury” ).Andrew Peterson - 2019 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 28 (4):725-736.
Informed consent for functional MRI research on comatose patients following severe brain injury: balancing the social benefits of research against patient autonomy.Tommaso Bruni, Mackenzie Graham, Loretta Norton, Teneille Gofton, Adrian M. Owen & Charles Weijer - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (5):299-303.
Electrographic correlates of brain reactions to afferent stimuli in postcomatose unconscious states after severe brain injury.E. V. Sharova - 2005 - Human Physiology 31 (3):245-254.
Precedent Autonomy and Surrogate Decisionmaking After Severe Brain Injury.Mackenzie Graham - 2020 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 29 (4):511-526.
Comment on Laureys et al. Self-consciousness in non-communicative patients☆.Jonathan Cole - 2007 - Consciousness and Cognition 16 (3):742-745.
Ethical considerations for performing decompressive craniectomy as a life-saving intervention for severe traumatic brain injury.Stephen Honeybul, Grant Gillett, Kwok Ho & Christopher Lind - 2012 - Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (11):657-661.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging, Covert awareness, and brain iniury.Adrian M. Owen - 2011 - In Judy Illes & Barbara J. Sahakian (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Oxford University Press. pp. 135.
The ethical and legal aspects of palliative sedation in severely brain-injured patients: a French perspective.Puybasset Louis, Mertes Paul-Michel, Audibert Gérard, Claudot Frédérique & Baumann Antoine - 2011 - Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 6 (1):4.
The ethical and legal aspects of palliative sedation in severely brain injured patients: a French perspective.Antoine Baumann, Frederique Claudot, Gerard Audibert, Paul-Michel Mertes & Louis Puybasset - 2011 - Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 6:4.
Analytics
Added to PP
2022-02-11
Downloads
6 (#1,106,014)
6 months
5 (#155,590)
2022-02-11
Downloads
6 (#1,106,014)
6 months
5 (#155,590)
Historical graph of downloads
Author Profiles
Citations of this work
Deciding with Others: Interdependent Decision‐Making.Emily A. Largent, Justin Clapp, Jennifer S. Blumenthal-Barby, Christine Grady, Amy L. McGuire, Jason Karlawish, Joshua D. Grill, Shana D. Stites & Andrew Peterson - 2022 - Hastings Center Report 52 (6):23-32.
References found in this work
Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making.Allen E. Buchanan & Dan W. Brock - 1989 - Cambridge University Press.
What Justifies the Allocation of Health Care Resources to Patients with Disorders of Consciousness?Andrew Peterson, Sean Aas & David Wasserman - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 12 (2-3):127-139.
Detecting awareness in the conscious state.Adrian M. Owen, Martin R. Coleman, Melanie Boly, Matthew H. Davis, Steven Laureys, Dietsje Jolles & John D. Pickard - 2006 - Science 313:1402.
The minimally conscious state: Definition and diagnostic criteria.Joseph T. Giacino & Childs N. Ashwal S. - 2002 - Neurology 58 (3):349-353.