This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Teaster, P. B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Resuscitation Policy Concerning Older Adults: Ethical Considerations of Paternalism Versus Autonomy

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

The heated national debate concerning health care must include a discussion of a patient's wishes and the implications of his or her right to determine individual medical treatment decisions, especially at the end of life. This article is an examination of physician paternalism versus patient autonomy concerning do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders within the context of utilitarian ethical theory. The author proposes effective compromise between the two; consideration of decision making on a case-by-case basis; enhanced education for all actors concerning cardiopulminary resucitation (CPR), DNR, and advanced directives; and consensus reached through democratic debate regarding the allocation of health care resources.

Journal of Applied Gerontology, Vol. 14, No. 1, 78-92 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/073346489501400106


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?