Over my dead body: Self-determination,proxy consent,and proportionate reason in the treatment of a Jehovah's Witness patient with severe traumatic hemorrhagic shock

Abstract

When a Jehovah’s Witness patient is traumatically injured, the lack of uniform professional consensus guidelines and the cultural knowledge deficit of many clinicians adds an additional layer of legal and ethical complexity to the inherent difficulty of managing a critically ill patient. We present here the case of an incapacitated Jehovah's Witness patient with severe traumatic hemorrhagic shock. We go on to discuss the historical and contemporary case law on proxy refusal of blood transfusion for the incapacitated adult, as well as the ethics of self-determination and the application of the principle of proportionate reason in the management of the critically injured Jehovah's Witness patient.

Keywords

Hemorrhagic shock Jehovah’s Witness medical ethics proportionate reason self-determination trauma surgery

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

DePergola

II . The neuroethical role of narrative identity in ethical decision making. J Cognition Neuroethics 2019; 6: 17–46.

Goldberg

. How bioethics and case law diverge in assessments of mental capacity: an argument for a narrative coherence standard. AJOB Neurosci 2020; 11: 7–17.

Winzelberg

Hanson

Tulsky

. Beyond autonomy: diversifying end-of-life decision-making approaches to serve patients and families. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005; 53: 1046–1050.

Sharman

Burger

Shatzel

, et al. Treatment of individuals who cannot receive blood products for religious or other reasons. Am J Hematol 2017; 92: 1370–1381.

Sine

Sharpe

. Ethics, risk, and patient-centered care: how collaboration between clinical ethicists and risk management leads to respectful patient care. J Healthc Risk Manag 2011; 31: 32–37.

Magauran BG Jr.

Risk management for the emergency physician: competency and decision-making capacity, informed consent, and refusal of care against medical advice. Emerg Med Clin North Am 2009; 27: 605–614, viii.

Appelbaum

Grisso

. Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med 1988; 319: 1635–1638.

Berg

JWAP

Lidz

Parker

. Informed Consent: Legal Theory and Clinical Practice. 2nd ed. Fairlawn, NJ: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Erickson v . Dilgard, 44 Misc.2d 27 252 N.Y.S.2d 705, 706 (1962).

10.

Application of the President and Directors of Georgetown College, Inc., a Body Corporate, 331 F.2d 1010 (D.C. Cir. 1964).

11.

In Re Estate of Brooks, 32 Ill. 2d 361, 205 N.E.2d 435 (1965).

12.

In Re Brown, 478 So.2d 1033, 1039, (MS 1985).

13.

In Re Dorone, 535 A.2d 452 (PA 1987).

14.

Werth v. Taylor 190 Mich. App. 141, 475 N.W.2d 426 (1991).

15.

Norwood Hospital v. Munoz, 409 Mass. 116, 564 N.E.2d 1017 (1991).

16.

Hua

Munson

Lucas

, et al. Medical treatment of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Surgery 2008; 143: 463–465.

17.

McCormick RA

. Doing Evil to Achieve Good: Moral Choice in Conflict Situations. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1985.

18.

DeMartino

Dudzinski

Doyle

, et al. Who decides when a patient can’t? Statutes on alternate decision makers. N Engl J Med 2017; 376: 1478–1482.