Responses

Download PDFPDF

‘Best interests’ in paediatric intensive care: an empirical ethics study
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Is limiting parental authority the answer?

    The authors conclude here that when withdrawing treatment in PICU is considered parents' refusal
    to consent can cause additional suffering as clinicians tend to extend burdensome treatment beyond
    what they think is reasonable to allow parents time to reconsider. Moreover, both parents and
    clinicians try to avoid approaching the courts for a decision.
    On the basis of these findings the authors suggest that limiting parental authority by using the concept of parental assent instead of consent could lead to an expeditious resolution in cases of disagreement and should be the focus of further research.
    This suggestion is not supported by the parental quotes used in this article. Indeed, one of the parent's objection to a court decision stems from his opinion that the decisions regarding withdrawal of treatment should be the domain of the parents. Limiting parental authority might therefore lead to increased adversarial relationships between the treating team and parents especially when parental views are overruled.
    Some quotes in this article as well as other research show that parents at the end of their child's life need time to
    often extensively research alternative treatments 'because you just need to have looked and
    exhausted every avenue'. Rather than limiting parental authority, it may thus be better to start the
    discussion regarding end of life care, including withholding treatment earlier....

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.