- Submit
-
Browse
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- More
Switch to: References
Citations of:
From Bridge to Destination? Ethical Considerations Related to Withdrawal of ECMO Support over the Objections of Capacitated Patients
Andrew Childress, Trevor Bibler, Bryanna Moore, Ryan H. Nelson, Joelle Robertson-Preidler, Olivia Schuman & Janet Malek
American Journal of Bioethics 23 (6):5-17 (2022)
Add citations
You must login to add citations.
|
|
|
In “Bioethics and the Moral Authority of Experience,” Nelson et al. explore what they refer to as “The Paradox of Experience.” The authors characterize this paradox formally as follows:(A) Personal... |
|
|
In this issue of American Journal of Bioethics, Childress et al. address one of the most challenging modern clinical ethical dilemmas: the awake, competent patient dependent on extracorporeal membr... |
|
|
Life-saving healthcare technology evolves over time, raising new ethical questions. What was once experimental becomes standard care, and what was once unthinkable becomes the next frontier. Ethici... |
|
|
Unfortunately, there is broad confusion regarding the justification for healthcare professionals unilaterally limiting or withdrawing life-prolonging interventions. Many mistakenly believe that suc... |
|
|
In their target article, Childress et al. (2023) contemplate the ethical considerations associated with determining if and when life-sustaining interventions (in this case, ECMO) can be unilaterall... |
|
|
Childress et al. (2023) critically examine claims used to support unilateral withdrawal of life-sustaining ECMO over the objections of capacitated patients. The authors raise important concerns abo... |
|
|
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is currently reserved predominantly for bridging patients to a different destination therapy, but the use of ECMO as a destination therapy itself (ECMO-DT... |
|
|
In their analysis Childress et al. (2023) suggest that withdrawal of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) over a patient’s dissent is not justified by existing ethical arguments. The alternat... |
|
|
In the pediatric heart-failure population, severity of illness often forces therapeutic decisions to be made under time-pressure, such that mechanical circulatory support (MCS) can be offered as a... |
|
|
The ethics of long-term Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) use, especially when organ recovery appears highly unlikely and the patient does not qualify for organ transplantation, are compli... |
|
|
I fundamentally agree with Childress et al. (2023) in the scenario they have constructed with Mr. J. None of the arguments they critically assess are ethically persuasive enough to justify removing... |
|
|
Childress et al. (2023) describe a disagreement between the competent patient and the physician recommending withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST). While the scenario is specific to ECMO, th... |
|
|
Childress et al. (2023) argue in favor of “ECMO-DT,” the provision of ECMO indefinitely as “destination therapy” in the ICU for patients who are dependent on the technology to sustain their lives.... |
|
|
Childress et al. (2023) present the case of a patient with capacity who requests to stay on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) indefinitely and highlight the ethical challenges associated w... |
|
|
Childress and coauthors present a case considering ECMO withdrawal over the objection of the conscious patient who is no longer a candidate for transplantation or other definitive therapeutic inter... |
|
|
Childress et al. (2023) have provided a cogent overview of the ethical considerations involved in withdrawing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) over a capacitated patient’s objection. Alth... |
|
|
Childress and colleagues (2023) review several arguments that would support the unilateral withdrawal of ECMO (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) against the wishes of a capacitated patient (Mr.... |
|
|
Some patients who are dependent on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are alert and retain capacity to participate in decision-making, including decisions regarding whether to continue life... |
|
|
Childress and colleagues conclude that arguments from distributive justice do not justify discontinuing ECMO over a capacitated patient’s objections (Childress et al. 2023). However, this conclusio... |
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-7c76586df8-5tf24 uwo