Year: 2023
Type: article
Abstract: The ethical and legal case for requiring surrogate informed consent before conducting an apnea test to diagnose death by neurologic criteria is grounded in 2 simple and unimpeachable premises:1. Apnea testing is a medical procedure, one that increases the risk of significant iatrogenic harm.2. Patients and surrogates have a broad and well-recognized right to refuse unwanted medical procedures. 1This remarkably clear and compelling case-which we have defended at length elsewhere 1,2 -is, nonetheless, not universally recognized across legal jurisdictions and clinical practice.Indeed, our position often meets substantive opposition, so it is worth responding to 4 primary objections.Informed consent for medical procedures varies according to the nature and magnitude of potential risks and complications.Procedures without consequential risks-such as venipuncture-do not require explicit consent while procedures with the potential for serious adverse effects do.The apnea test falls closer to the latter than the former. 1 Serious complications *These authors contributed equally to this work.
Source: Neurology
Authors: Ivor David Berkowitz, Jeremy Garrett
Language: English
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W4383747226