Ethical failings of CPSO policy and the health care consent act: case review.
Autonomy
End-of-life
Ethical responsibility
Medical consent
Palliative care
Quality of life
Journal
BMC medical ethics
ISSN: 1472-6939
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Ethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088680
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 03 2019
19 03 2019
Historique:
received:
16
08
2018
accepted:
11
03
2019
entrez:
21
3
2019
pubmed:
21
3
2019
medline:
16
8
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
End-of-life disputes in Ontario are currently overwhelmingly assessed through the singular lens of patient autonomy. The current dispute resolution mechanism(s) does not adequately consider evidence-based medical guidelines, standards of care, the patient's best interests, expert opinion, or distributive justice. We discuss two cases adjudicated by the Consent and Capacity board of Ontario that demonstrate the over emphasis on patient autonomy. Current health care policy and the Health Care Consent Act also place emphasis on patient autonomy without considering other ethically defensible factors. We argue that current policy and legislation require amendment, and unless there are measures undertaken to modify them, both the quality of care provided and the long-term capabilities of the health care system to remain publicly-funded, comprehensive and equitable, are at stake.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30890158
doi: 10.1186/s12910-019-0357-y
pii: 10.1186/s12910-019-0357-y
pmc: PMC6425586
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
20Références
Neurocrit Care. 2005;2(2):198-205
pubmed: 16159066
Bioethics. 2006 Apr;20(2):92-104
pubmed: 16770879
CMAJ. 2016 Mar 1;188(4):245-246
pubmed: 26728846
West J Med. 2000 May;172(5):310-3
pubmed: 18751282
J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Oct;25(10):1083-9
pubmed: 20645019
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015 Jun 1;191(11):1318-30
pubmed: 25978438
J Bioeth Inq. 2011 Jun;8(2):123-131
pubmed: 21765643