Ethical issues in stroke care

Author(s):  
Hugh Markus ◽  
Anthony Pereira ◽  
Geoffrey Cloud

The chapter on ethical issues in stroke care sets out an ethical framework incorporating patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice to inform patient-centred stroke care. It covers a broad range of legal information as relevant to stroke care in the United Kingdom such as the European Law of Human Rights, The Human Rights Act 1998, The Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2007, and Deprivation of Liberty safeguards (DoLS). It covers widely applicable guidance around consent, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, artificial nutrition and hydration, and withholding treatment and withdrawing medical treatment. A section is included to review the various types of Prolonged Disorders of Consciousness which are rare but devastating complication of stroke. An approach to end of life or palliative care in the stroke patient is also discussed.

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma L Teper ◽  
Julian C Hughes ◽  
◽  

The prevalence of dementia across Europe and the world is increasing. People die with and from dementia and, as such, advanced dementia can be considered a terminal condition. This, alongside the realisation that care for people with dementia is deficient, has led to increasing interest in palliative care in dementia. Palliative care can be a rather broad term with different meanings, but nonetheless guidelines and expert opinions have been developed with the aim of improving overall care for people with dementia. Although at times the evidence on which these guidelines are based is somewhat sparse, they provide guidance in specific areas relevant to dementia. The main areas covered are pain, infection and fevers, artificial nutrition and hydration, resuscitation and psychological, social and spiritual needs. We shall consider the evidence on which guidance is based and then highlight a recent ethical framework developed to help thinking around the issues that arise in dementia care.


2021 ◽  
pp. 156-176
Author(s):  
Jo Samanta ◽  
Ash Samanta

This chapter deals with key legal and ethical issues surrounding end-of-life decisions, with particular reference to physician-assisted death, such as euthanasia. Suicide and assisted suicide, administration of pain relief, and futility are considered. Relevant legislation such as the Suicide Act 1961 (as amended by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009), the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 are discussed. The chapter examines several bioethical principles, including sanctity-of-life and quality-of-life debates; autonomy, beneficence, and medical paternalism; personhood, palliative care, and the double effect doctrine. Finally, it considers human rights issues, treatment requests, incompetent patients, prolonged disorders of consciousness, and locked-in syndrome. Recent cases are considered.


US Neurology ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 07 (01) ◽  
pp. 10
Author(s):  
Emma L Teper ◽  
Julian C Hughes ◽  
◽  

The prevalence of dementia across Europe and the world is increasing. People die with and from dementia and, as such, advanced dementia can be considered a terminal condition. This, alongside the realization that care for people with dementia is deficient, has led to increasing interest in palliative care in dementia. Palliative care can be a rather broad term with different meanings, but nonetheless guidelines and expert opinions have been developed with the aim of improving overall care for people with dementia. Although at times the evidence on which these guidelines are based is somewhat sparse, they provide guidance in specific areas relevant to dementia. The main areas covered are pain, infection and fevers, artificial nutrition and hydration, resuscitation, and psychological, social, and spiritual needs. We shall consider the evidence on which guidance is based and then highlight a recent ethical framework developed to help thinking around the issues that arise in dementia care.


2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-20
Author(s):  
Simon Gabe ◽  
Gwen Sayers

AbstractIn the UK, restraining medical patients in order to provide care is widely considered to be outmoded and difficult to justify. The prevailing clinical intuition that restraining patients is generally wrong (even when restraint is essential in order to provide artificial nutrition and hydration) has prompted us to develop a policy that is compatible with common law, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Human Rights Act 1998. The nature and scope of the problem are illustrated with clinical cases. These, in turn, serve to demonstrate the tension that arises between article 2, article 3 and article 8 rights, when incompetent patients are restrained in order to feed.


Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Brind [1991] UKHL 4, House of Lords. The case considered whether the Secretary of State could restrict the editorial decisions of broadcasters as regards the way in which messages from spokespersons for proscribed organizations were broadcast. The United Kingdom was a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) when the case was heard, but the case also predates the passage of the Human Rights Act 1998. There is discussion of the legal position of the ECHR under the common law in the United Kingdom, and the concept of proportionality in United Kingdom’s domestic jurisprudence. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.


2020 ◽  
Vol 87 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-130
Author(s):  
John J. Raphael ◽  
Michael A. Vacca ◽  
Annmarie Hosie ◽  
Natalie Rodden ◽  
Ashley K. Fernandes ◽  
...  

There is much confusion surrounding how to interpret provision of artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) at the bedside in complicated clinical circumstances. The specific scenario that prompted these questions was a request by a patient and her family to remove a feeding tube that had become, in the patient’s eyes and opinion, disproportionately burdensome in her particular set of clinical circumstances. This clinically relevant article can be viewed as a bedside interpretation of Catholic bioethical teachings on provision of ANH to the dying patient. Please note that this article does not address specific ethical issues that pertain to persistent vegetative state, which is beyond the scope of this particular discussion.


2001 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean McHale ◽  
Ann Gallagher ◽  
Isobel Mason

In this article we consider some of the implications of the UK Human Rights Act 1998 for nurses in practice. The Act has implications for all aspects of social life in Britain, particularly for health care. We provide an introduction to the discourse of rights in health care and discuss some aspects of four articles from the Act. The reciprocal relationship between rights and obligations prompted us to consider also the relationship between guidelines in the United Kingdom Central Council’s Code of professional conduct and the requirements of the Human Rights Act 1998. We conclude with the recommendation that the new legislation should be welcomed for its potential to support good practice and to urge critical and reflective practice rather than as yet another burdensome bureaucratic imposition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document