Skip to main content
Log in

“If an acute event occurs, what should we do?” Diverse ethical approaches to decision-making in the ICU

  • Scientific Contribution
  • Published:
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze an Intensive Care Unit case that required ethics consultation at a University Hospital in Northern Italy. After the case was resolved, a retrospective ethical analysis was performed by four clinical ethicists who work in different healthcare contexts (Italy, the United States, and Switzerland). Each ethicist used a different method to analyze the case; the four general approaches provide insight into how these ethicists conduct ethics consultations at their respective hospitals. Concluding remarks examine the similarities and differences among the various approaches and offer a reflection concerning the possibility of a shared resolution to the case. The authors’ efforts to come to a tentative consensus may serve as an example for professionals working in medical contexts that reflect an increasing pluralism of values. This article aims to respond to some of these concerns by illustrating how different methods in clinical ethics would be used when considering a real case. The goal is not to establish the best model (if there is one) on a theoretical level, but to learn from actual practice in order to see if there are common elements in the different methods, and to validate their pertinence to clinical ethics consultation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albrecht, G. L., and P. J. Devlieger. 1999. The Disability Paradox: High Quality of Life Against All Odds. Social Science and Medicine 48 (8): 977–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. 2009. Improving Competencies in Clinical Ethics Consultation. Glenview: American Society for Bioethics and Humanities.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. 2011. Core Competencies Update Task Force. Core competencies for health care ethics consultation: A report of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. Glenview: American Society for Bioethics and Humanities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausilio, M. P., R. M. Arnold, and S. G. Youngner. 2000. Health Care Ethics Consultation: Nature, Goals and Competencies. A Position Paper from the Society for Health and Human Values-Society for Bioethics Consultation Task Force on Standards for Bioethics Consultation. Annals on Internal Medicine 133 (1): 59–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L., and J. Childress. 2012. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L., L. Walters, J. P. Kahn, and A. C. Mastroianni. 2008. Contemporary Issues in Bioethics. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlinger, N., B. Jennings, and S. M. Wolf. 2013. The Hastings Center Guidelines for Decision on Life-Sustaining Treatment and Care Near the End of Life, revisited and expanded. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bravo, G., M. Sene, and M. Arcand. 2018. Making Medical Decisions for an Incompetent Older Adult When Both a Proxy and an Advance Directive are Available: Which is More Likely to Reflect the Older Adult’s Preferences? Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (7): 498–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody, H., and M. Clark. 2014. Narrative Ethics: A Narrative. Narrative Ethics: The Role of Stories in Bioethics, special report. Hastings Center Report 44 (1): S7–S11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deledda, G., F. Moretti, M. Rimondini, and C. Zimmermann. 2013. How Patients Want Their Doctor to Communicate. A Literature Review on Primary Care Patients’ Perspectives. Patient Education and Counseling 90: 297–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeMartino, E. S., D. M. Dudzinski, and C. K. Doyle, et al. 2017. Who Decides When a Patient Can't? Statutes on Alternate Decision Makers. New England Journal of Medicine 376 (15): 1478–1482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engelhardt, H. T. Jr. 2010. Beyond the Best Interests of Children: Four Views of the Family and of Foundational Disagreements Regarding Pediatric Decision Making. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35: 499–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Family Health Care Decisions Act. Public Health Law Article 29-CC, Sess. 2010 (New York 2010): https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PBH/A29-C.

  • Feder-Kittay, E. 2006. The Concept of Care Ethics in Biomedicine: The Case of Disability. In Bioethics in Cultural Contexts. Reflections on Methods and Finitude, eds. Christoph Rehmann-Sutter, Marcus Düwell, Dietmar Mieth, 319–340. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, A. W. 2014. Narrative Ethics as Dialogical Storytelling. Narrative Ethics: The Role of Stories in Bioethics, Special Report. Hastings Center Report 44 (1): S16–S20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giannini, A., A. Pessina, and E. Tacchi. 2003. End-of-Life Decisions in Intensive Care Units: Attitudes of Physicians in an ITALIAN Urban Setting. Intensive Care Medicine 29: 1902–1910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, L. A., and D. P. Sulmasy. 2002. Proportionality, Terminal Suffering and the Restorative Goals of Medicine. Theoretical Medicine 23: 321–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonsen, A. R., M. Siegler, and W. J. Winslade. 2010. Clinical Ethics, a Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopelman, L. M. 1997. The Best-Interests Standard as Threshold, Ideal, and Standard of Reasonableness. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 22 (3): 271–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopelman, L. M., and A. E. Kopelman. 2007. Using a New Analysis of the Best Interests Standard to Address Cultural Disputes: Whose Data, Which Values? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28: 373–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lang, F., and T. Quill. 2004. Making Decisions with Families at the End of Life. American Family Physician 70 (4): 719–723.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montello, M. 2014. Narrative Ethics. Narrative Ethics: The Role of Stories in Bioethics, Special Report. Hastings Center Report 44 (1): S2–S6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicoli, F., and M. Picozzi. 2017. Killing or Allowing Someone to Die: A Difference Defined Exclusively by the Criteria of “Terminal? Making Decisions Regarding a Patient’s Death. Medicina Historica 1/1: 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S. M., J. M. Clayton, K. Hancock, P. N. Butow, S. Carrick, D. Currow, D. Ghersi, P. Glare, R. Hagerty, and M. H. Tattersall. 2007. A Systematic Review of Prognostic/End- of-Life Communication with Adults in the Advanced Stages of a Life-Limiting Illness: Patient/Caregiver Preferences for the Content, Style, and Timing of Information. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 34 (1): 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino, E. D., and D. C. Thomasma. 1988. For the Patient’s Good: The Restoration of Beneficence in Health Care. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, H. S. 2016. A Guide to Psychosocial and Spiritual Care at the End of Life. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Porz, R. 2016. Ethische Theorien als gedankliche Tools—Die Care Ethics. Teil 4 der Serie. Klinische Ethik neu Gedacht. Schweizerische Ärztezeitung 97 (7): 262–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. 2008. The Professional Responsibilities of Medicine. eds. R. Rhodes, L. P. Francis, and A. Silvers. The Blackwell Guide to Medical Ethics, 71–87. Hoboken: Blackwell.

  • Rhodes, R., and D. Alfandre. 2007. A Systematic Approach to Clinical Moral Reasoning. Clinical Ethics 2 (2): 66–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R., and I. R. Holzman. 2004. The Not Unreasonable Standard for Assessment of Surrogates and Surrogate Decisions. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (4): 367–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salter, E. K. 2012. Deciding for a Child: A Comprehensive Analysis of the Best Interest Standard. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 33(3): 179–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shalowitz, D. I., E. Garrett-Mayer, and D. Wendler. 2006. The Accuracy of Surrogate Decision Makers: A Systematic Review. Archives of Internal Medicine 166 (6): 493–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sulmasy, D. P., K. Haller, and P. B. Terry. 1994. More Talk, Less Paper: Predicting the Accuracy of Substituted Judgments. American Journal of Medicine 96 (5): 432–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sulmasy, D. P., P. B. Terry, C. S. Weisman, D. J. Miller, R. Y. Stallings, M. A. Vettese, and K. B. Haller. 1998. The Accuracy of Substituted Judgments in Patients with Terminal Diagnoses. Annals of Internal Medicine 128 (8): 621–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swidler, R. N. 2010. The Family Health Care Decisions Act: A Summary of Key Provisions. Health Law Journal 15 (1): 32–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarzian, A. J., and L. D. Wocial, ASBH Clinical Ethics Consultation Affairs Committee. 2015. A Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibilities for Health Care Ethics Consultants: Journey to the Present and Implications for the Field. American Journal of Bioethics 15(5): 38–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, T. 1999. Ethics Consultant: Problem Solver or Spiritual Counselor? Human Studies 22 (1): 43–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tong, R. 1997. Feminist Approaches to Bioethics: Theoretical Reflections and Practical Applications. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, J. C. 1993. Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welie, J. V. M., and A. M. J. ten Have. 2014. The Ethics of Forgoing Life-Sustaining Treatment: Theoretical Considerations and Clinical Decision Making. Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine 9: 14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Federico Nicoli.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nicoli, F., Cummins, P., Raho, J.A. et al. “If an acute event occurs, what should we do?” Diverse ethical approaches to decision-making in the ICU. Med Health Care and Philos 22, 475–486 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-019-09887-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-019-09887-6

Keywords

Navigation