The Moral Significance of Biofixtures: A Response to Nathan Goldstein, Bridget Tracy, and Rosamond Rhodes "But I have a pacer…there is no point in engaging in hypothetical scenarios": A Non-imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Kelsey Gipe
{"title":"The Moral Significance of Biofixtures: A Response to Nathan Goldstein, Bridget Tracy, and Rosamond Rhodes \"But I have a pacer…there is no point in engaging in hypothetical scenarios\": A Non-imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation.","authors":"Kelsey Gipe","doi":"10.1017/S0963180125000039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Based on the case report of Nathan Goldstein et al., \"But I have a pacer…there is no point in engaging in hypothetical scenarios\": A Non-imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation, it is reasonable to conclude that it was, all-things-considered, ethically appropriate to grant the patient's request to deactivate her pacemaker. Philosophically, and as a clinical ethicist, I support the team's decision to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation. However, it is worth exploring a bit further whether the distress on the part of the outside hospital's ethics committee and providers-who declined to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation-may actually track something of moral significance. In this commentary, I argue that there are reasonable grounds for holding that deactivation of a 'biofixture' such as a pacemaker may be more analogous in moral terms to medical aid in dying than it is to standard cases of withdrawal of life support at the end of a patient's life.</p>","PeriodicalId":55300,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-2"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180125000039","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Based on the case report of Nathan Goldstein et al., "But I have a pacer…there is no point in engaging in hypothetical scenarios": A Non-imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation, it is reasonable to conclude that it was, all-things-considered, ethically appropriate to grant the patient's request to deactivate her pacemaker. Philosophically, and as a clinical ethicist, I support the team's decision to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation. However, it is worth exploring a bit further whether the distress on the part of the outside hospital's ethics committee and providers-who declined to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation-may actually track something of moral significance. In this commentary, I argue that there are reasonable grounds for holding that deactivation of a 'biofixture' such as a pacemaker may be more analogous in moral terms to medical aid in dying than it is to standard cases of withdrawal of life support at the end of a patient's life.

生物装置的道德意义:对Nathan Goldstein, Bridget Tracy和Rosamond Rhodes的回应“但是我有一个起搏器……参与假设的场景没有意义”:一个非迫在眉睫的垂死病人要求起搏器停用。
根据Nathan Goldstein等人的病例报告,“但是我有一个起搏器……没有必要参与假设的场景”:一个非濒死病人的起搏器停用请求,我们可以合理地得出结论,考虑到所有的事情,允许病人的起搏器停用请求在道德上是合适的。从哲学上讲,作为一名临床伦理学家,我支持团队的决定,尊重病人要求停用起搏器的要求。然而,值得进一步探讨的是,医院外的伦理委员会和医护人员——他们拒绝尊重病人要求停用心脏起搏器的请求——是否真的有道德意义。在这篇评论中,我认为有合理的理由认为,“生物固定装置”(如起搏器)的停用在道德上可能更类似于死亡时的医疗援助,而不是在病人生命结束时撤回生命支持的标准案例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics is designed to address the challenges of biology, medicine and healthcare and to meet the needs of professionals serving on healthcare ethics committees in hospitals, nursing homes, hospices and rehabilitation centres. The aim of the journal is to serve as the international forum for the wide range of serious and urgent issues faced by members of healthcare ethics committees, physicians, nurses, social workers, clergy, lawyers and community representatives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信