Related Experiment Videos
What does Cruzan mean to the practicing physician?
B D White1, M Siegler, P A Singer
1Center for Clinical Medical Ethics, University of Chicago, IL 60637.
Archives of Internal Medicine
|May 1, 1991
Summary
The Supreme Court affirmed states' authority in right-to-die cases, allowing them to set standards for withdrawing life support. Physicians must respect competent patients' wishes and document future healthcare directives.
Area of Science:
- Medical Ethics
- Constitutional Law
- Patient Rights
Background:
- The U.S. Supreme Court's Cruzan decision grants states significant power over "right to die" cases.
- Competent adults possess a constitutional "liberty interest" to accept or refuse medical treatment.
Purpose of the Study:
- To analyze the implications of the Cruzan decision for practicing physicians.
- To outline physician responsibilities regarding patient autonomy and end-of-life care.
Main Methods:
- Legal analysis of the Supreme Court's ruling in the Cruzan case.
- Interpretation of the "clear and convincing" evidence standard for patient wishes.
Main Results:
- States can regulate the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment.
- Physicians must honor competent patients' decisions regarding medical care.
- Documentation of patient wishes and surrogate designation is crucial.
Conclusions:
- Physicians should proactively discuss end-of-life preferences with competent patients.
- For incompetent patients, previously expressed wishes should guide treatment decisions over quality of life or family desires.