How We should Support Patients’ Decision Making at End of Life – From a National Survey of Hospital Ethics Committees in Japan

2016 ◽  
Vol 06 (03) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomoko Kodama Kawashima
1983 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 902-905 ◽  
Author(s):  
STUART J. YOUNGNER ◽  
DAVID L. JACKSON ◽  
CLAUDIA COULTON ◽  
BARBARA W. JUKNIALIS ◽  
ERA M. SMITH

2002 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
GLENN McGEE ◽  
JOSHUA P. SPANOGLE ◽  
ARTHUR L. CAPLAN ◽  
DINA PENNY ◽  
DAVID A. ASCH

In 1992, the Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) passed a mandate that all its approved hospitals put in place a means for addressing ethical concerns.Although the particular process the hospital uses to address such concerns—ethics consultant, ethics forum, ethics committee—may vary, the hospital or healthcare ethics committee (HEC) is used most often. In a companion study to that reported here, we found that in 1998 over 90% of U.S. hospitals had ethics committees, compared to just 1% in 1983, and that many have some and a few have sweeping clinical powers in hospitals.


1984 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 427-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert M. Veatch

AbstractThe debate concerning the legal and ethical bases of guardian refusal of medical treatment on behalf of incompetent patients often ignores critical distinctions among types of patients and guardians. For example, patients who have expressed preferences regarding treatment while competent are distinguishable from patients who have always lacked the competency requisite to expressing a treatment preference. “Bonded guardians,” whose relationship with the patient preexisted guardianship, should have a different role in the decision-making process than “nonbonded guardians,” who were strangers to the patient prior to the guardian-ward relationship.This Article proposes criteria for guardian treatment refusal on behalf of incompetent patients. Under the model for guardian decision making presented here, bonded guardians should be preferred over nonbonded guardians, and bonded guardians should be allowed discretion to make treatment choices, limited only by a standard of reasonableness policed by the courts. The Author presents legal and ethical justifications for the bonded guardian's heightened role. Finally, he considers the proper roles of health professionals, hospital ethics committees, and judges in the decision-making process.


HEC Forum ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
EricM. Meslin ◽  
Claire Rayner ◽  
Vic Larcher ◽  
Tony Hope ◽  
Julian Savulescu

1998 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
ELLEN L. CSIKAI

Interdisciplinary hospital ethics committees have been the most common response to the mandates for ethical review procedures set forth by the Joint Commission for the Accreditation of Health Care Organizations (JCAHO, 1995 Standards), the American Hospital Association, and within institutions themselves. A 1989 national survey reported that 60% of hospitals had ethics committees. However, little is still known about the current state of these committees in hospitals, their composition, what functions are performed, or what issues are discussed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-407
Author(s):  
Eileen F. Baker ◽  
Joel M. Geiderman ◽  
Chadd K. Kraus ◽  
Rebecca Goett

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document