Browsing by Author "Rosoff, Philip M"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Open Access
Adolescent Medical Decisionmaking Rights: Reconciling Medicine and Law.
(American journal of law & medicine, 2021-12) Coleman, Doriane Lambelet; Rosoff, Philip M
Dennis Lindberg came into his aunt's care when he was in the 4th grade because his parents struggled with drug addiction and could not provide for him. At thirteen, he was baptized in his aunt's faith as a Jehovah's Witness. Just days after he turned fourteen, on November 6, he was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.The prognosis was that Dennis had a 75% chance of cure with standard oncology treatment. Consistent with the requirements of his new faith, however, Dennis told his doctors, "I do not want to be treated if the requirement is that I would have to take a blood transfusion." His aunt, whose custodial rights seem not to have included medical decisionmaking, was adamant that "[t]his is Dennis's decision."The hospital social worker assigned to Dennis's case assured his aunt that "having just turned 14, [he] could be considered mature enough to make his own decisions." But hospital psychologists declined to evaluate Dennis's maturity because they did "not have the tools for such an assessment." Established hospital policy described the failure to provide a minor with necessary, life-saving care as medical neglect. Hospital ethicists advised that Dennis's autonomy interests were outweighed by the benefits associated with treatment. And, standard oncology practice norms are that doctors should push back against minors' lifesaving treatment refusals. Still, Dennis's doctor agreed with his social worker and aunt, saying, "We owe respect to a 14-year-old[.]" In this view, he was supported by colleagues on staff and by hospital counsel.A county judge got the case only at the eleventh hour, on an emergency motion filed by Dennis's parents and Child Protective Services for a declaration of dependency and to compel the necessary transfusion. Although Dennis was degrading rapidly, his doctor testified that if a transfusion were ordered that day, Dennis still had a 70% chance of survival. The judge had no background in the applicable law and no time to research the issues; nevertheless, he denied the motion concluding, "It is time to do what Dennis has decided." "Seven hours later, at 6 p.m., on Nov. 28, Dennis died."1.
Open Access
An Ethical and Legal Framework for Physicians as Surrogate Decision-Makers for Their Patients.
(J Law Med Ethics, 2015) Rosoff, Philip M; Leong, Kelly M
In Western industrialized countries, it is well established that legally competent individuals may choose a surrogate healthcare decision-maker to represent their interests should they lose the capacity to do so themselves. There are few limitations on who they may select to fulfill this function. However, many jurisdictions place restrictions on or prohibit the patient's attending physician or other provider involved with an individual's care to serve in this role. Several authors have previously suggested that respect for the autonomy of patients requires that there be few (if any) constraints on whomever they may appoint as a proxy. In this essay we revisit this topic by first providing a survey of current state laws governing this activity. We then analyze the clinical and ethical circumstances in which potential difficulties could arise. We take a more nuanced and circumspect view of prior suggestions that patients should have virtually unfettered liberty to choose their healthcare proxies. We suggest a strategy to balance the freedom of patients' right to choose their surrogates with fiduciary duty of the state as regulator of medical practice. We identify six domains of possible concern with such relationships and suggest straightforward methods of mitigating their potential negative effects that could be plausibly be incorporated into physician practice.
Open Access
Brain death determination: the imperative for policy and legal initiatives in Sub-Saharan Africa.
(Glob Public Health, 2015-11-13) Waweru-Siika, Wangari; Clement, Meredith Edwards; Lukoko, Lilian; Nadel, Simon; Rosoff, Philip M; Naanyu, Violet; Kussin, Peter S
The concept of brain death (BD), defined as irreversible loss of function of the brain including the brainstem, is accepted in the medical literature and in legislative policy worldwide. However, in most of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) there are no legal guidelines regarding BD. Hypothetical scenarios based on our collective experience are presented which underscore the consequences of the absence of BD policies in resource-limited countries (RLCs). Barriers to the development of BD laws exist in an RLC such as Kenya. Cultural, ethnic, and religious diversity creates a complex perspective about death challenging the development of uniform guidelines for BD. The history of the medical legal process in the USA provides a potential way forward. Uniform guidelines for legislation at the state level included special consideration for ethnic or religious preferences in specific states. In SSA, medical and social consensus on the definition of BD is a prerequisite for the development BD legislation. Legislative policy will (1) limit prolonged and futile interventions; (2) mitigate the suffering of families; (3) standardise clinical practice; and (4) facilitate better allocation of scarce critical care resources in RLCs. There is a clear-cut need for these policies, and previous successful policies can serve to guide these efforts.