The Mount Sinai journal of medicine, New York
-
Should physicians be mandated to report domestic violence involving a competent adult patient regardless of whether or not he or she consents to the report? This is a complex ethical and moral issue; in some states such as California, Colorado, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and New Mexico it has become a legal one as well. The Federal health privacy regulation instituted in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) addresses issues of privacy protection for survivors of domestic violence, but it does not preempt those state laws that are less (or more) protective of patient privacy. In the above states, physicians and/or health care providers are mandated to report acts of domestic violence to an agency, under their own circumstances, regardless of whether the physician or health care worker believes that reporting the violence is in the patient's best interest or not. But is mandatory reporting truly "good" or "bad" for the patient, the physician or society as a whole? This article explores the laws and the evidence (including evidence-based research) surrounding the issue of mandatory reporting of domestic violence when it pertains to a competent adult.
-
Issues related to informed consent and confidentiality often arise in the emergency care setting. When the patient is an adolescent further complexities are introduced, especially when the desires of the adolescent are different from those of the parent. Understanding when an adolescent can give informed consent and what the limits of confidentiality are will assist medical personnel in providing the most appropriate care. These concepts are elucidated with a specific case.
-
Patient refusal of indicated medical treatment, especially when the treatment would be life sustaining, presents all physicians, especially emergency physicians, with the responsibility of determining whether the patient has the capacity to refuse treatment, and whether the patient's refusal is informed. These two crucial questions present a number of dilemmas for physicians who may have no prior relationship with that particular patient. The ethical and legal principles for determining decision-making capacity and assuring that refusal is informed are described, and an algorithm for responding to patient refusals is presented.
-
In 1996, the federal government published regulations that allow investigators to obtain a waiver of informed consent for emergency research when certain very specific criteria are met. The participants must be unable to give consent as a result of their medical condition, and the intervention involved in the research must be administered before consent from the participants' legally authorized representative is feasible. ⋯ The author reviews the development of these regulations, often referred to as "The Final Rule," the ethical basis for the waiver, and the specific provisions of the federal regulations that govern research without consent in emergency situations. Reactions of proponents, critics and the lay public are discussed.
-
"Triage" is a term generally referring to the social practice of sorting or categorizing. While it originally had an innocent, commercial meaning referring to sorting crops according to quality, the term quickly took on a more ominous meaning referring to classifying battlefield casualties into three groups: those too well-off to be treated and then, among those more seriously wounded, one group that will get medical attention and another that will not. The moral problem is how to distinguish between the latter two groups. ⋯ Two organ transplant examples--tissue typing for kidneys and geographical priority for allocating livers--show that American social policy, when forced to choose between allocating on the basis of efficiency or allocating on the basis of justice, will consider both principles, but give equal or dominant priority to justice--even though this priority is understood to be relatively inefficient. Since health care professionals have a recognized preference for efficiency over justice and lay people are inclined towards justice, leaving mass disaster triage policy in the hands of health professionals will predictably structure the policy in a way that conflicts with the moral priorities of the lay population. Formal public debate that recognizes the conflict between efficiency and equity--professional and lay priorities--is therefore essential.