Shaw David, Georgieva Denie, Haase Bernadette, Gardiner Dale, Lewis Penney, Jansen Nichon, Wind Tineke, Samuel Undine, McDonald Maryon, Ploeg Rutger
1 Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland. 2 Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 3 Dutch Transplant Foundation, Leiden, the Netherlands. 4 Deputy National Clinical Lead for Organ Donation, NHS Blood and Transplant, Nottingham, United Kingdom. 5 Dickson Poon School of Law, King's College London, United Kingdom. 6 Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 7 Eurotransplant International Foundation, Leiden, the Netherlands. 8 Robinson College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. 9 Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences and Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Transplantation. 2017 Mar;101(3):482-487. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001536.
Millions of people want to donate their organs after they die for transplantation, and many of them have registered their wish to do so or told their family and friends about their decision. For most of them, however, this wish is unlikely to be fulfilled, as only a small number of deaths (1% in the United Kingdom) occur in circumstances where the opportunity to donate organs is possible. Even for those who do die in the "right" way and have recorded their wishes or live in a jurisdiction with a "presumed consent" system, donation often does not go ahead because of another issue: their families refuse to allow donation to proceed. In some jurisdictions, the rate of "family overrule" is over 10%. In this article, we provide a systematic ethical analysis of the family overrule of donation of solid organs by deceased patients, and examine arguments both in favor of and against allowing relatives to "veto" the potential donor's intentions. First, we provide a brief review of the different consent systems in various European countries, and the ramifications for family overrule. Next, we describe and discuss the arguments in favor of permitting donation intentions to be overruled, and then the arguments against doing so. The "pro" arguments are: overrule minimises family distress and staff stress; families need to cooperate for donation to take place; families might have evidence regarding refusal; and failure to permit overrules could weaken trust in the donation system. The "con" arguments are: overrule violates the patient's wishes; the family is too distressed and will regret the decision; overruling harms other patients; and regulations prohibit overrule. We conclude with a general discussion and recommendations for dealing with families who wish to overrule donation. Overall, overrule should only rarely be permitted.
数以百万计的人希望在死后捐献器官用于移植,其中许多人已经登记了他们的意愿,或者告诉了家人和朋友他们的决定。然而,对他们中的大多数人来说,这个愿望不太可能实现,因为只有少数死亡情况(在英国为1%)提供了捐献器官的机会。即使是那些以“正确”方式死亡并记录了自己意愿的人,或者生活在实行“推定同意”制度的司法管辖区,器官捐献往往也无法进行,因为另一个问题:他们的家人拒绝允许捐献。在一些司法管辖区,“家属否决”率超过10%。在本文中,我们对已故患者实体器官捐献中的家属否决进行了系统的伦理分析,并审视了支持和反对允许亲属“否决”潜在捐献者意愿的论点。首先,我们简要回顾了欧洲各国不同的同意制度,以及家属否决的影响。接下来,我们描述并讨论支持推翻捐献意愿的论点,然后是反对这样做的论点。“支持”的论点是:推翻可以将家属的痛苦和工作人员的压力降至最低;捐献需要家属的配合;家属可能有拒绝捐献的证据;不允许推翻可能会削弱对捐献系统的信任。“反对”的论点是:推翻违背了患者的意愿;家属过于痛苦,会后悔这个决定;推翻会伤害其他患者;而且规定禁止推翻。我们最后进行了一般性讨论,并就如何应对希望推翻捐献的家属提出了建议。总体而言,应该很少允许推翻。