PEDIATRICS Vol. 57 No. 4 April 1976, pp. 487-493
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Duff, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, A. G. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Duff, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, A. G. M.

On Deciding the Care of Severely Handicapped or Dying Persons: With Particular Reference to Infants

Raymond S. Duff M.D.1 and A. G. M. Campbell M.B., F.R.C.P.1

1 Department of Pediatrics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, and the Department of Child Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland

Two philosophies of deciding the care of severely handicapped or dying persons are commonly used. The first is "disease-oriented" which places death in the extreme negative position. The second is "person-oriented" which regards some kinds of severely compromised living as worse than death. The first philosophy is convenient for the development and the use of medical technology but its unbridled application commonly dehumanizes patients and aggravates suffering. The second philosophy may protect persons from the indignities of pointless treatment or the cruelties of disease. But its use in some respects is illegal and may be unwise; also, in caring for infants, children, and incompetent adults, the second philosophy creates special problems since the patient himself cannot participate in decision-making.

In deciding which philosophy to follow in a given situation, we believe the patient (when able), the sorrowing family, and the concerned physician are the best judges. Since these persons vary widely, they must be entrusted with more freedom to change or to ignore commonly accepted principles if the values of patients and families in the many unique situations of living, illness, and dying are to be protected. We believe with few exceptions that these persons are now worthy of this trust and with experience they would use it with growing wisdom.

Submitted on March 3, 1975
Accepted on August 5, 1975




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 West J Nurs ResHome page
W. J. Pinch, M. L. Spielman, and M. J. Harrison
Parental Perceptions of Ethical Issues Post-NICU Discharge
West J Nurs Res, August 1, 1993; 15(4): 422 - 440.
[PDF]