Original Article
Journal of Perinatology (2008) 28, 641–645; doi:10.1038/jp.2008.58; published online 3 July 2008
Withdrawal of life sustaining treatment in children in the first year of life
E B Eason1, R J Castriotta2, V Gremillion3 and J W Sparks4
- 1Private Practice, Houston, TX, USA
- 2Division Director of Pulmonary and Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas–Houston Medical School, Houston, TX, USA
- 3University of Texas–Houston Medical School, Houston, TX, USA
- 4Department of Pediatrics, 982165 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
Correspondence: Dr JW Sparks, Department of Pediatrics, 982165 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-2165, USA. E-mail: jsparks@unmc.edu
Received 23 October 2007; Revised 14 February 2008; Accepted 22 February 2008; Published online 3 July 2008.
Abstract
Objective:
Since the enactment of the Texas Advance Directives Act of 1999, the Memorial Hermann Hospital Medical Appropriateness Review Committee (MARC) MARC reviewed six cases of children in the first year of life, three from the Neonatal ICU and three from the Pediatric ICU. We aimed to describe the characteristics of these patients and the role of the MARC in this process.
Study Design:
A single reviewer retrospectively reviewed the cases for patient diagnoses, demographics, related ethical issues and the actions of the MARC.
Result:
Each of the six patients required life-sustaining therapy, and each patient had a Do Not Resuscitate order on the chart. The MARC determined that it would be appropriate to withdraw life-sustaining support in four of the cases and to continue support in two of the cases. Five of the patients died in the hospital before discharge: two after discontinuation of support, one during the 10-day waiting period, and two died on full support after the Committee determined that continued treatment was medically appropriate. One patient was transferred to another hospital during the 10-day waiting period.
Conclusion:
These cases document the application of the TADA/MARC process in infants, even in circumstances where care was withdrawn without concurrence of the family. We found the MARC process to demand a very high degree of certainty of diagnosis and prognosis to determine continuation of care to be inappropriate. We conclude that the MARC promoted communication and provided additional protections to patients, families, physicians and staff.
Keywords:
ethics, infant, life-sustaining treatment
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated
RESEARCH
Response to ?Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the first year of life?
Journal of Perinatology Letter
In response to: Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the first year of life
Journal of Perinatology Letter
Decision-making in the delivery room: a survey of neonatologists
Journal of Perinatology Original Article
Response to Clark Study on Miller
Journal of Perinatology Letter
