Hastening Death by Selective Disclosure of Treatment Options—Beneficence or “Euthanasia by Deception”?
- Roberta Springer LoewyAffiliated withUniversity of California
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
In this paper I make a radical claim regarding selective non-disclosure of treatment options that have some hope of prolonging a patient's life. I suggest that selective non-disclosure under such circumstances is tantamount to what might be called “euthanasia by deception.” I offer a case to test the validity of my claim and to demonstrate how the failure to offer or, at least, to discuss renal dialysis in this case (and, by inference, any other form of treatment which has some hope of prolonging a patient's life) qualifies as paternalism in its most egregious form. I discuss the actions of the health care team and try to find some plausible reasons why they acted as they did. I conclude that there must be greater emphasis placed on teaching clinicians how better to incorporate frank, open and on-going discussion about the central elements of the therapeutic relationship with patients long before they lose decisional capacity.
- Hastening Death by Selective Disclosure of Treatment Options—Beneficence or “Euthanasia by Deception”?
Health Care Analysis
Volume 12, Issue 3 , pp 241-250
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- decisional capacity
- shared decisionmaking
- Author Affiliations
- 1. University of California, Davis, California, USA