de Vos Mirjam A, Seeber Antje A, Gevers Sjef K M, Bos Albert P, Gevers Ferry, Willems Dick L
Section of Medical Ethics, Division of Public Health and Epidemiology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Neurology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Med Ethics. 2015 Feb;41(2):195-200. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101395. Epub 2014 Jun 10.
In the ethical and clinical literature, cases of parents who want treatment for their child to be withdrawn against the views of the medical team have not received much attention. Yet resolution of such conflicts demands much effort of both the medical team and parents.
To discuss who can best protect a child's interests, which often becomes a central issue, putting considerable pressure on mutual trust and partnership.
We describe the case of a 3-year-old boy with acquired brain damage due to autoimmune-mediated encephalitis whose parents wanted to stop treatment. By comparing this case with relevant literature, we systematically explored the pros and cons of sharing end-of-life decisions with parents in cases where treatment is considered futile by parents and not (yet) by physicians.
Sharing end-of-life decisions with parents is a more important duty for physicians than protecting parents from guilt or doubt. Moreover, a request from parents on behalf of their child to discontinue treatment is, and should be, hard to over-rule in cases with significant prognostic uncertainty and/or in cases with divergent opinions within the medical team.
在伦理和临床文献中,父母不顾医疗团队的意见要求停止对其子女治疗的案例并未受到太多关注。然而,解决此类冲突需要医疗团队和父母双方付出很大努力。
探讨谁能最好地保护儿童的利益,这往往成为核心问题,给相互信任和合作关系带来巨大压力。
我们描述了一名3岁男孩的案例,他因自身免疫介导的脑炎而获得性脑损伤,其父母希望停止治疗。通过将此案例与相关文献进行比较,我们系统地探讨了在父母认为治疗无效而医生(尚未)认同的情况下,与父母分享临终决策的利弊。
对医生来说,与父母分享临终决策比让父母免于内疚或疑虑更为重要。此外,在预后存在重大不确定性的情况下和/或医疗团队内部存在不同意见的情况下,父母代表孩子提出的停止治疗的请求很难被驳回,而且也应该如此。