Making Medical Decisions for Incapacitated Patients Without Proxies: Part I
- 35 Downloads
To date no one has identified or described the population of incapacitated patients being treated in an inpatient setting who lack proxy decision-makers. Nor, despite repeated calls for protocols to be developed for decision-making, has any institution reported on the utilization of such a protocol. In 2005, our urban tertiary care hospital instituted a protocol utilizing community members of the ethics committee to meet with the medical providers and engage in shared decision-making for patients without proxies (PWPs). We conducted a retrospective chart review and in this paper describe nearly 200 patients who were identified and treated according to the protocol over a 12 year period. After an aggressive search, family members were located for a surprising number of patients, leaving 80 patients who needed decisions to be made utilizing the PWP committee. We review the decisions required, the results of the shared decision-making meetings, and the patient outcomes. Our experience has shown that a protocol involving community volunteers to make decisions for PWPs in a timely manner is feasible and ethically defensible. The protocol has been accepted by physicians and utilized with increasing frequency. Because it was possible to gather at least minimal information on most patients, a standard of “informed best interest” was used to make decisions. PWP committee recommendations varied, but in all cases agreement was reached with the attending physicians.
KeywordsUnbefriended Substituted judgment Best interest Surrogate decision making Ethics committee
The authors thank O. Mary Dwyer and Hillary Sedlacek for assistance in reviewing medical records, and Dr. Allyson Robichaud for reviewing the manuscript. The authors also thank the volunteers who serve on the PWP committee.
Dr. CG, Ms. LM and Dr. BD were responsible for the concept and design of the study. Dr. CG, Ms. LM, and Mr. EB acquired the data. Dr. CG was responsible for analysis and interpretation of the data, and drafting of the manuscript. Drs. BD and CG and Mr. EB were responsible for critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. Dr. BD provided supervision.
Compliance with Ethical Standard
Conflict of interests
None of the authors have conflicts to report.
- American Medical Association. Code of medical ethics opinion 2.1.2 Decisions for adult patients who lack capacity. https://www.ama-assn.org/sites/default/files/media-browser/code-of-medical-ethics-chapter-2.pdf. Published 2016. Accessed February 24, 2017.
- Asch, D. A., Hansen-Flaschen, J., & Lanken, P. N. (1995). Decisions to limit or continue life-sustaining treatment by critical care physicians in the United States: Conflicts between physicians’ practices and patients’ wishes. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 151(2), 288–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hyun, I., Griggins, C., Weiss, M., Robbins, D., Robichaud, A., & Daly, B. (2006). When patients do not have a proxy: A procedure for medical decision making when there is no one to speak for the patient. Journal of Clinical Ethics, 17(4), 323–330.Google Scholar
- Karp, N., & Wood, E. (2003). Incapacitated and alone: Health care decision-making for the unbefriended elderly. Washington, DC: American Bar Association Commission on Law and Aging.Google Scholar
- Pope, T. M. (2017). Unbefriended and unrepresented: Better medical decision making for incapacitated patients without healthcare surrogates. Georgia State University Law Review, 33(4), 923–1019.Google Scholar
- Pope, T. M., & Sellers, T. (2012a). Legal briefing: The unbefriended: Making healthcare decisions for patients without surrogates (Part 1). Journal of Clinical Ethics, 23(1), 84–96.Google Scholar
- Pope, T. M., & Sellers, T. (2012b). Legal briefing: The unbefriended: Making healthcare decisions for patients without surrogates (Part 2). Journal of Clinical Ethics, 23(2), 177–192.Google Scholar