Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:40:53.495Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Barnes Case: Taking Difficult Futility Cases Public

Currents in Contemporary Bioethics Column

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Ruth A. Mickelsen ,
Daniel S. Bernstein ,
Mary Faith Marshall  and
Steven H. Miles
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The recent Minnesota case of In re Emergency Guardianship of Albert Barnes illustrates an emerging class of cases where a dispute between a family proxy and a hospital over “medical futility” requires legal resolution. The case was further complicated by the patient’s spouse who fraudulently claimed to be the patient’s designated health care proxy and who misrepresented the patient’s previously expressed treatment preferences. Barnes demonstrates the degree of significant administrative and institutional support to the health care team, ethics consultants, and futility committees that is required when a futility dispute escalates to the need for judicial resolution. An institutional futility policy, especially one that is endorsed by other regional medical centers and organizations, is an important foundation for a hospital that seeks judicial support in a dispute over medical futility in end of life care.

Type
JLME Column
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , Spring 2013 , pp. 374 - 378
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

In re Emergency Guardianship of Albert N Barnes. No. 27-GC-PR-111-16 (Fourth Judicial District Probate Ct. Div., Minnesota, Hennepin County, January 14, 2011).Google Scholar
Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, “Medical Futility in End-of-Life Care,” JAMA 281, no. 10 (1999): 937–941.Google Scholar
In re Emergency Guardianship of Albert N Barnes, supra, note 1.Google Scholar
Werhane, P. H., “Business Ethics, Stakeholder Theory, and the Ethics of Healthcare Organizations,” Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 9, no. 2 (2000): 169–181, at 171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ozar, D. Berg, J. Werhane, P., and Emanuel, L., Organizational Ethics in Health Care: Toward a Model for Ethical Decision Making by Provider Organizations (Chicago: Institute for Ethics–AMA, 2000).Google Scholar
American College of Healthcare Executives Code of Ethics, American College of Healthcare Executives, available at <http://www.ache.org/abt_ache/ACHECodeofEthics-2007.pdf> (last visited July 12, 2012).+(last+visited+July+12,+2012).>Google Scholar
Austin, W., “The Ethics of Everyday Practice: Healthcare Environments as Moral Communities,” Advances in Nursing Science 30, no. 1 (2007): 81–88.Google Scholar
Volbrecht, R. M., Nursing Ethics: Communities in Dialogue (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002).Google Scholar
Marshall, M. R. and Liaschenko, J., “Implementing Policy to the Wider Community,” in Hester, D. M. and Shonfeld, T., eds., Education and Guidance for Healthcare Ethics Committee Members (In press: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
McCullough, L. B., “An Ethical Framework for the Responsible Leadership of Accountable Care Organizations,” American Journal of Medical Quality 27, no. 3 (2011): 189–194.Google Scholar
Id., at 193.Google Scholar
Worthley, J. A., The Ethics of the Ordinary in Healthcare: Concepts and Cases (Chicago: Health Administration Press, 1997): at 203–205.Google Scholar
Hamric, A. B. and Blackhall, L. J., “Nurse-Physician Perspectives on the Care of Dying Patients in Intensive Care Units: Collaboration, Moral Distress, and Ethical Climate,” Critical Care Medicine 35, no. 2 (2007): 422–429, at 425.Google Scholar
In re the Conservatorship of Helga M. Wanglie No. Px-91-280 (Fourth Judicial District Probate Ct. Div., Minnesota, Hennepin County July 1, 1991).Google Scholar
Pope, T. M., “Surrogate Selection: An Increasingly Viable, but Limited, Solution to Intractable Futility Disputes, Saint Louis University Journal of Health Law & Policy 3 (2010): 183–252.Google Scholar
In re Livadas, , No.08/037030 (N.Y. Apr. 28, 2008).Google Scholar
See Pope, , supra note 15, at 229.Google Scholar
White, D. B. and Pope, T. M., “The Courts, Futility, and the Ends of Medicine,” JAMA 307, no. 2 (2012): 151–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breslin, J. MacRae, S. Bell, J., and Singer, P., “Top 10 Health Care Ethics Challenges Facing the Public: Views of Toronto Bioethicists,” BMC Medical Ethics 6, no. 1 (2005): 5–12.Google Scholar
Gladwell, M., The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference (New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2000).Google Scholar
Editorial, “Little Progress on End-of-Life Care,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, January 22, 2011, available at <http://www.startribune.com/opinion/editorials/114394124.html> (last visited March 1, 2013).+(last+visited+March+1,+2013).>Google Scholar