Physicians' evaluations of patients' decisions to refuse oncological treatment.

نویسندگان

  • T van Kleffens
  • E van Leeuwen
چکیده

OBJECTIVE To gain insight into the standards of rationality that physicians use when evaluating patients' treatment refusals. DESIGN OF THE STUDY Qualitative design with in depth interviews. PARTICIPANTS The study sample included 30 patients with cancer and 16 physicians (oncologists and general practitioners). All patients had refused a recommended oncological treatment. RESULTS Patients base their treatment refusals mainly on personal values and/or experience. Physicians mainly emphasise the medical perspective when evaluating patients' treatment refusals. From a medical perspective, a patient's treatment refusal based on personal values and experience is generally evaluated as irrational and difficult to accept, especially when it concerns a curative treatment. Physicians have a different attitude towards non-curative treatments and have less difficulty accepting a patient's refusal of these treatments. Thus, an important factor in the physician's evaluation of a treatment refusal is whether the treatment refused is curative or non-curative. CONCLUSION Physicians mainly use goal oriented and patients mainly value oriented rationality, but in the case of non-curative treatment refusal, physicians give more emphasis to value oriented rationality. A consensus between the value oriented approaches of patient and physician may then emerge, leading to the patient's decision being understood and accepted by the physician. The physician's acceptance is crucial to his or her attitude towards the patient. It contributes to the patient's feeling free to decide, and being understood and respected, and thus to a better physician-patient relationship.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

CLINICAL ETHICS Physicians’ evaluations of patients’ decisions to refuse oncological treatment

Objective: To gain insight into the standards of rationality that physicians use when evaluating patients’ treatment refusals. Design of the study: Qualitative design with indepth interviews. Participants: The study sample included 30 patients with cancer and 16 physicians (oncologists and general practitioners). All patients had refused a recommended oncological treatment. Results: Patients ba...

متن کامل

Ethical Considerations in Respecting Patient's Autonomy and Right to Refuse Treatment: A case Report

One of the most challenging aspects of treatment is when patient seriously refuses the desired by treating physician. On the other hand, refusing treatment is a condition of the patient's right to be aware, but does such a right also imposes a moral obligation on the treating physician or not? This study discusses the diagnosis of Systemic Lupus Erythematosis disease. This article attempts to p...

متن کامل

Can the patient decide? Evaluating patient capacity in practice.

Physicians assess the decision-making capacity of their patients at every clinical encounter. Patients with an abrupt change in mental status, who refuse recommended treatment, who consent too hastily to treatment or who have a known risk factor for impaired decision-making should be evaluated more carefully. In addition to performing a mental status examination (along with a physical examinati...

متن کامل

مسؤولیت مدنی پزشک در قبال بیماران اورژانسی (با مطالعه تطبیقی حقوق ایران و انگلستان)

This research has tried to scrutinize an important issue that is Civil liability of physicians for emergency patients (under its comparative form) for the first time in our legal literature. To achieve this the civil liability of physicians for emergency patients is examined from two perspectives A)civil liability for doctors who refuse to treat or leave emergency rescue. B)Civil responsibility...

متن کامل

Professional ethics in extreme circumstances: responsibilities of attending physicians and healthcare providers in hunger strikes.

Hunger strikes potentially present a serious challenge for attending physicians. Though rare, in certain cases, a conflict can occur between the obligations of beneficence and autonomy. On the one hand, physicians have a duty to preserve life, which entails intervening in a hunger strike before the hunger striker loses his life. On the other hand, physicians' duty to respect autonomy implies th...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Journal of medical ethics

دوره 31 3  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2005