“Medical Terrorism” or Best Interests?:

Armed with the above knowledge, what practical recourse exists to hospitalists caring for patients in PVS whose hope for regaining consciousness is exceedingly remote? First, inquire about advance directives that may direct care in such circumstances. If advance directives are not present, identify the surrogate decision maker, keeping in mind the state-to-state legal variations in the surrogate hierarchy. If the appropriate surrogate wishes to continue care and the treating physician objects, attempt to achieve a consensus. Time to adjust to the devastating plight and repeated nonjudgmental discussions focusing on the patient’s wishes often lead surrogates to accept withdrawal, or at least to establish limits on care (e.g., do-not-resuscitate order, withholding antibiotics and nutrition). Involvement of hospital ethics committees, primary care physicians, social workers, and religious or cultural ombudsmen may facilitate this process. Barring a mutually acceptable solution or progress in this direction, physicians may decide to cede to the wishes of the surrogates or, as a last recourse, involve the judicial system to achieve resolution.

References

1. Jennett B. Plum F. Persistent vegetative state after brain damage: a syndrome in search of a name. Lancet. 1972; 1:734-7.
2. The Multi-Society Task Force on PVS. Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state—first of two parts. NEJM. 1994; 330:1499-1508.
3. The Multi-Society Task Force on PVS. Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state—second of two parts. NEJM. 1994; 330: 1572-9.
4. Lo B. Resolving Ethical Dilemmas. A Guide for Clinicians. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; p. 73.
5. Eisenberg D. Lessons of the Schiavo battle. Time. April 4, 2005. pp. 26-27.
6. Cantor NL. Can health care providers obtain judicial intervention against surrogates who demand “medically inappropriate” life support for incompetent patients? Crit Care Med. 1996; 24:883-87.
7. Jonsen AR, Siegler M, and Winslade WJ. Clinical Ethics. A practical approach to ethical decisions in clinical practice. 5th ed. McGraw-Hill; p. 129.
8. Address of Pope John Paul II to the participants in the international congress on “life-sustaining treatments and vegetative state: scientific advances and ethical dilemmas.” 20 March, 2004 available at: www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/2004/march/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20040320_congress-fiamc_en.html, Last accessed on May 11, 2005.
9. Doble JE, Haig AJ, Anderson C, Katz R. Impairment, activity, participation, life satisfaction and survival in persons with locked-in syndrome for over a decade. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2003;18:435-44.
10. Booth CM, Boone RH, Tomlinson J, and Detsky AS. Is this patient dead, vegetative or severely impaired? Assessing outcome for comatose survivors of cardiac arrest. JAMA. 2004; 291:870-9.
11. Levy DE, Caronna JJ, et al. Predicting coma from hypoxic-schemic coma. JAMA. 1985; 253:1420-6.
12. Zandbergen EG, de Haan RJ, et al. Systematic review of early prediction of poor outcome in anoxic-ischaemic coma. Lancet. 1998; 352:1808-12.