Cardiopulmonary resuscitation ethics: a response to Michael Ardagh

Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (1):64-65 (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

SIRThere are some important flaws in Michael Ardagh's reasoning.11. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a “blanket term” for different interventions. Curative and supportive treatments have different ethical contexts and cannot be discussed at the same level. It is imperative to ascribe curative interventions within CPR the same status as any other curative intervention, such as antibiotics for infections or surgery for appendicitis. Then we will be able to discuss the ethical context of purely supportive measures such as chest compressions. To address the “ethics of CPR” is a dangerous misnomer.The preferences of emergency personnel2 suggest the willingness to undergo curative interventions early during CPR, but not protracted supportive interventions. Conversely, withholding curative interventions during CPR should only be considered when any curative treatments would also be withheld.2. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is performed to offer the patient a benefit. However, CPR as a whole is only marginally effective. …

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

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.
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and the Presumption of Informed Consent.David J. Buckles - 2020 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 20 (4):683-693.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
104 (#482,858)

6 months
24 (#434,395)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?