The Ethics of extra treatment
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
This is something that I have been considering for quite a while based on a fictional story I had read.
An unconscious individual must undergo emergency surgery in order to stabilise them and prevent the patent's death. This medical intervention is happening without the patent's explicit consent however since a reasonable person can be expected to consent to life saving surgery (absent a living will or some other indication) I don't think anyone would have any ethical concerns about it.
However while the surgery is occurring something that would not cause immediate harm but is highly likely to cause extreme disability in the long term is discovered (for example a tumour). Is it ethical to fix this newly discovered condition at the same time?
cancer surgery medical-ethics
edited Jan 24 at 4:07
De Novo
1,52815
asked Jan 24 at 3:16
Q the PlatypusQ the Platypus
1384
add a comment |
This is something that I have been considering for quite a while based on a fictional story I had read.
An unconscious individual must undergo emergency surgery in order to stabilise them and prevent the patent's death. This medical intervention is happening without the patent's explicit consent however since a reasonable person can be expected to consent to life saving surgery (absent a living will or some other indication) I don't think anyone would have any ethical concerns about it.
However while the surgery is occurring something that would not cause immediate harm but is highly likely to cause extreme disability in the long term is discovered (for example a tumour). Is it ethical to fix this newly discovered condition at the same time?
cancer surgery medical-ethics
edited Jan 24 at 4:07
De Novo
1,52815
asked Jan 24 at 3:16
Q the PlatypusQ the Platypus
1384
add a comment |
This is something that I have been considering for quite a while based on a fictional story I had read.
An unconscious individual must undergo emergency surgery in order to stabilise them and prevent the patent's death. This medical intervention is happening without the patent's explicit consent however since a reasonable person can be expected to consent to life saving surgery (absent a living will or some other indication) I don't think anyone would have any ethical concerns about it.
However while the surgery is occurring something that would not cause immediate harm but is highly likely to cause extreme disability in the long term is discovered (for example a tumour). Is it ethical to fix this newly discovered condition at the same time?
cancer surgery medical-ethics
edited Jan 24 at 4:07
De Novo
1,52815
asked Jan 24 at 3:16
Q the PlatypusQ the Platypus
1384
This is something that I have been considering for quite a while based on a fictional story I had read.
An unconscious individual must undergo emergency surgery in order to stabilise them and prevent the patent's death. This medical intervention is happening without the patent's explicit consent however since a reasonable person can be expected to consent to life saving surgery (absent a living will or some other indication) I don't think anyone would have any ethical concerns about it.
However while the surgery is occurring something that would not cause immediate harm but is highly likely to cause extreme disability in the long term is discovered (for example a tumour). Is it ethical to fix this newly discovered condition at the same time?
cancer surgery medical-ethics
cancer surgery medical-ethics
edited Jan 24 at 4:07
De Novo
1,52815
asked Jan 24 at 3:16
Q the PlatypusQ the Platypus
1384
edited Jan 24 at 4:07
De Novo
1,52815
asked Jan 24 at 3:16
Q the PlatypusQ the Platypus
1384
edited Jan 24 at 4:07
De Novo
1,52815
edited Jan 24 at 4:07
De Novo
1,52815
edited Jan 24 at 4:07
De Novo
1,52815
1,52815
asked Jan 24 at 3:16
Q the PlatypusQ the Platypus
1384
asked Jan 24 at 3:16
Q the PlatypusQ the Platypus
1384
asked Jan 24 at 3:16
Q the PlatypusQ the Platypus
1384
1384
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
You're describing an unexpected intra-operative finding. The possibility of unexpected findings (and their treatment) is usually discussed during the consent for the original procedure. Of course, in this situation, there was no initial discussion. The way this sort of issue is usually framed in medical ethics uses a framework of four principles (see Beauchamp and Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics): autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Here, beneficence (the best interest of the patient), outweighs autonomy (the right of the patient to make his or her own choice) for the life saving surgery, and the same would need to occur for addressing the unexpected finding. One would have to (intraoperatively) consider the risks and benefits of removing the tumor, as well as the risks of a second operation were the surgeon to defer. In, e.g., a laparotomy, a readily visualized tumor would almost certainly be removed and sent to pathology. Other cases (e.g., neurosurgery, with a tumor involving eloquent cortex), are more complicated. This sort of thing is less common now, given the likelihood of seeing any tumor that would be obvious during surgery ahead of time with high resolution cross sectional imaging, but it does happen.
You can read a little about the decision making around unexpected intra-operative findings here, in the context of abdominal surgery.
answered Jan 24 at 4:03
De NovoDe Novo
1,52815
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "607"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmedicalsciences.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f18470%2fthe-ethics-of-extra-treatment%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You're describing an unexpected intra-operative finding. The possibility of unexpected findings (and their treatment) is usually discussed during the consent for the original procedure. Of course, in this situation, there was no initial discussion. The way this sort of issue is usually framed in medical ethics uses a framework of four principles (see Beauchamp and Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics): autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Here, beneficence (the best interest of the patient), outweighs autonomy (the right of the patient to make his or her own choice) for the life saving surgery, and the same would need to occur for addressing the unexpected finding. One would have to (intraoperatively) consider the risks and benefits of removing the tumor, as well as the risks of a second operation were the surgeon to defer. In, e.g., a laparotomy, a readily visualized tumor would almost certainly be removed and sent to pathology. Other cases (e.g., neurosurgery, with a tumor involving eloquent cortex), are more complicated. This sort of thing is less common now, given the likelihood of seeing any tumor that would be obvious during surgery ahead of time with high resolution cross sectional imaging, but it does happen.
You can read a little about the decision making around unexpected intra-operative findings here, in the context of abdominal surgery.
answered Jan 24 at 4:03
De NovoDe Novo
1,52815
add a comment |
You're describing an unexpected intra-operative finding. The possibility of unexpected findings (and their treatment) is usually discussed during the consent for the original procedure. Of course, in this situation, there was no initial discussion. The way this sort of issue is usually framed in medical ethics uses a framework of four principles (see Beauchamp and Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics): autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Here, beneficence (the best interest of the patient), outweighs autonomy (the right of the patient to make his or her own choice) for the life saving surgery, and the same would need to occur for addressing the unexpected finding. One would have to (intraoperatively) consider the risks and benefits of removing the tumor, as well as the risks of a second operation were the surgeon to defer. In, e.g., a laparotomy, a readily visualized tumor would almost certainly be removed and sent to pathology. Other cases (e.g., neurosurgery, with a tumor involving eloquent cortex), are more complicated. This sort of thing is less common now, given the likelihood of seeing any tumor that would be obvious during surgery ahead of time with high resolution cross sectional imaging, but it does happen.
You can read a little about the decision making around unexpected intra-operative findings here, in the context of abdominal surgery.
answered Jan 24 at 4:03
De NovoDe Novo
1,52815
add a comment |
You're describing an unexpected intra-operative finding. The possibility of unexpected findings (and their treatment) is usually discussed during the consent for the original procedure. Of course, in this situation, there was no initial discussion. The way this sort of issue is usually framed in medical ethics uses a framework of four principles (see Beauchamp and Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics): autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Here, beneficence (the best interest of the patient), outweighs autonomy (the right of the patient to make his or her own choice) for the life saving surgery, and the same would need to occur for addressing the unexpected finding. One would have to (intraoperatively) consider the risks and benefits of removing the tumor, as well as the risks of a second operation were the surgeon to defer. In, e.g., a laparotomy, a readily visualized tumor would almost certainly be removed and sent to pathology. Other cases (e.g., neurosurgery, with a tumor involving eloquent cortex), are more complicated. This sort of thing is less common now, given the likelihood of seeing any tumor that would be obvious during surgery ahead of time with high resolution cross sectional imaging, but it does happen.
You can read a little about the decision making around unexpected intra-operative findings here, in the context of abdominal surgery.
answered Jan 24 at 4:03
De NovoDe Novo
1,52815
You're describing an unexpected intra-operative finding. The possibility of unexpected findings (and their treatment) is usually discussed during the consent for the original procedure. Of course, in this situation, there was no initial discussion. The way this sort of issue is usually framed in medical ethics uses a framework of four principles (see Beauchamp and Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics): autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Here, beneficence (the best interest of the patient), outweighs autonomy (the right of the patient to make his or her own choice) for the life saving surgery, and the same would need to occur for addressing the unexpected finding. One would have to (intraoperatively) consider the risks and benefits of removing the tumor, as well as the risks of a second operation were the surgeon to defer. In, e.g., a laparotomy, a readily visualized tumor would almost certainly be removed and sent to pathology. Other cases (e.g., neurosurgery, with a tumor involving eloquent cortex), are more complicated. This sort of thing is less common now, given the likelihood of seeing any tumor that would be obvious during surgery ahead of time with high resolution cross sectional imaging, but it does happen.
You can read a little about the decision making around unexpected intra-operative findings here, in the context of abdominal surgery.
answered Jan 24 at 4:03
De NovoDe Novo
1,52815
answered Jan 24 at 4:03
De NovoDe Novo
1,52815
answered Jan 24 at 4:03
De NovoDe Novo
1,52815
answered Jan 24 at 4:03
De NovoDe Novo
1,52815
1,52815
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Medical Sciences Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmedicalsciences.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f18470%2fthe-ethics-of-extra-treatment%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
