Adolescent Medical Decisionmaking Rights: Reconciling Medicine and Law.
Abstract
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.
Type
Journal articlePermalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/24749Published Version (Please cite this version)
10.1017/amj.2022.2Publication Info
Coleman, Doriane Lambelet; & Rosoff, Philip M (2021). Adolescent Medical Decisionmaking Rights: Reconciling Medicine and Law. American journal of law & medicine, 47(4). pp. 386-426. 10.1017/amj.2022.2. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/24749.This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this
article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
More Info
Show full item recordScholars@Duke
Philip Martin Rosoff
Professor Emeritus of Pediatrics
My main interests are clinical ethics with a concentration on the equitable allocation
of scarce resources (rationing). In this area, I have done work on planning for pandemic
influenza and allocation of drugs during shortages. Before retirement I played a major
role in the Clinical Ethics Service at Duke Hospital and chair the hospital's Ethics
Committee.

Articles written by Duke faculty are made available through the campus open access policy. For more information see: Duke Open Access Policy
Rights for Collection: Scholarly Articles
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info