Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Minimally Conscious States, Deep Brain Stimulation, and What is Worse than Futility

  • Published:
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concept of futility is sometimes regarded as a cloak for medical paternalism in that it rolls together medical and value judgments. Often, despite attempts to disambiguate the concept, that is true and it can be applied in such a way as to marginalize the real interests of a patient. I suggest we replace it with a conceptual toolkit that includes physiological futility, substantial benefit (SB), and the risk of unacceptable badness (RUB) in that these concepts allow us to articulate what is at stake in ethical judgments where outcomes are crucial in determining what should be done.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The case in question involved the use of high-dose Vitamin C in a patient who was imminently dying of H1N1 disease and about to be “switched off” but who, against all expectations, responded to that intervention when the family insisted on it.

References

  • Ardagh, M. 2000. Futility has no utility in resuscitation medicine. Journal of Medical Ethics 28: 396–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A.V., G. Gillett, and D.G. Jones. 2005. Medical ethics, 4th ed. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chisholm, N., and G. Gillett. 2005. Nick’s story: Living with locked in syndrome (with Nick Chisholm). British Medical Journal 331: 94–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giacino, J.T., et al. 2002. The minimally conscious state: Definition and diagnostic criteria. Neurology 58: 349–353.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gillett, G. 2004. Bioethics and the clinic: Hippocratic reflections. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillett, G. 2010. Vitamin C: Ascerbic ethical discussions. Journal of Law and Medicine 18(2): 263–267.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gillon, R. 1997. Futility—too ambiguous and perjorative a term. Journal of Medical Ethics 23: 339–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Glannon, W. 2008. Neurostimulation and the minimally conscious state. Bioethics 22: 337–345.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kasimov, S. 2005. A new approach to the issue of medical futility: Reframing the debate. Macalester Journal of Philosophy 14(1): 112–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohindra, R.K. 2007. Medical futility: A conceptual model. Journal of Medical Ethics 33: 71–75.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schiff, N., J. Giacino, and J. Fins. 2009. Deep brain stimulation, neuroethics, and the minimally conscious state. Archives of Neurology 66: 697–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schniederman, L., N. Jecker, and A. Jonsen. 1990. Medical futility: Its meaning and ethical implications. Annals of Internal Medicine 112: 949–954.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Otago Medical School, Dunedin, New Zealand

    Grant Gillett

Authors
  1. Grant Gillett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grant Gillett.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gillett, G. Minimally Conscious States, Deep Brain Stimulation, and What is Worse than Futility. Bioethical Inquiry 8, 145–149 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-011-9292-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-011-9292-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation