An official American Thoracic Society policy statement

Managing conscientious objections in intensive care medicine

ATS Ethics and Conflict of Interest Committee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Rationale: Intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians sometimes have a conscientious objection (CO) to providing or disclosing information about a legal, professionally accepted, and otherwise available medical service. There is little guidance about how to manage COs in ICUs. Objectives: To provide clinicians, hospital administrators, and policymakers with recommendations for managing COs in the critical care setting. Methods: This policy statement was developed by a multidisciplinary expert committee using an iterative process with a diverse working group representing adult medicine, pediatrics, nursing, patient advocacy, bioethics, philosophy, and law. Main Results: The policy recommendations are based on the dual goals of protecting patients' access to medical services and protecting the moral integrity of clinicians. Conceptually, accommodating COs should be considered a "shield " to protect individual clinicians' moral integrity rather than as a "sword" to impose clinicians' judgments on patients. The committee recommends that: (1) COs in ICUs be managed through institutional mechanisms, (2) institutions accommodate COs, provided doing so will not impede a patient's or surrogate's timely access to medical services or information or create excessive hardships for other clinicians or the institution, (3) a clinician's CO to providing potentially inappropriate or futile medical services should not be considered sufficient justification to forgo the treatment against the objections of the patient or surrogate, and (4) institutions promote open moral dialogue and foster a culture that respects diverse values in the critical care setting. Conclusions: This American Thoracic Society statement provides guidance for clinicians, hospital administrators, and policymakers to address clinicians' COs in the critical care setting.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)219-227
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Volume191
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 15 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Critical Care
Medicine
Hospital Administrators
Pediatric Nursing
Patient Advocacy
Bioethics
Information Services
Intensive Care Units
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

An official American Thoracic Society policy statement : Managing conscientious objections in intensive care medicine. / ATS Ethics and Conflict of Interest Committee.

In: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 191, No. 2, 15.01.2015, p. 219-227.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{247ac1cb27b64d828f04639a784fcaf6,
title = "An official American Thoracic Society policy statement: Managing conscientious objections in intensive care medicine",
abstract = "Rationale: Intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians sometimes have a conscientious objection (CO) to providing or disclosing information about a legal, professionally accepted, and otherwise available medical service. There is little guidance about how to manage COs in ICUs. Objectives: To provide clinicians, hospital administrators, and policymakers with recommendations for managing COs in the critical care setting. Methods: This policy statement was developed by a multidisciplinary expert committee using an iterative process with a diverse working group representing adult medicine, pediatrics, nursing, patient advocacy, bioethics, philosophy, and law. Main Results: The policy recommendations are based on the dual goals of protecting patients' access to medical services and protecting the moral integrity of clinicians. Conceptually, accommodating COs should be considered a {"}shield {"} to protect individual clinicians' moral integrity rather than as a {"}sword{"} to impose clinicians' judgments on patients. The committee recommends that: (1) COs in ICUs be managed through institutional mechanisms, (2) institutions accommodate COs, provided doing so will not impede a patient's or surrogate's timely access to medical services or information or create excessive hardships for other clinicians or the institution, (3) a clinician's CO to providing potentially inappropriate or futile medical services should not be considered sufficient justification to forgo the treatment against the objections of the patient or surrogate, and (4) institutions promote open moral dialogue and foster a culture that respects diverse values in the critical care setting. Conclusions: This American Thoracic Society statement provides guidance for clinicians, hospital administrators, and policymakers to address clinicians' COs in the critical care setting.",
author = "{ATS Ethics and Conflict of Interest Committee} and Mithya Lewis-Newby and Mark Wicclair and Thaddeus Pope and Rushton, {Cynthia H} and Farr Curlin and Douglas Diekema and Debbie Durrer and William Ehlenbach and Wanda Gibson-Scipio and Bradford Glavan and Langer, {Rabbi Levi} and Constantine Manthous and Cecile Rose and Anthony Scardella and Hasan Shanawani and Siegel, {Mark D.} and Halpern, {Scott D.} and Truog, {Robert D.} and White, {Douglas B.}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1164/rccm.201410-1916ST",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "191",
pages = "219--227",
journal = "American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "1073-449X",
publisher = "American Thoracic Society",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An official American Thoracic Society policy statement

T2 - Managing conscientious objections in intensive care medicine

AU - ATS Ethics and Conflict of Interest Committee

AU - Lewis-Newby, Mithya

AU - Wicclair, Mark

AU - Pope, Thaddeus

AU - Rushton, Cynthia H

AU - Curlin, Farr

AU - Diekema, Douglas

AU - Durrer, Debbie

AU - Ehlenbach, William

AU - Gibson-Scipio, Wanda

AU - Glavan, Bradford

AU - Langer, Rabbi Levi

AU - Manthous, Constantine

AU - Rose, Cecile

AU - Scardella, Anthony

AU - Shanawani, Hasan

AU - Siegel, Mark D.

AU - Halpern, Scott D.

AU - Truog, Robert D.

AU - White, Douglas B.

PY - 2015/1/15

Y1 - 2015/1/15

N2 - Rationale: Intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians sometimes have a conscientious objection (CO) to providing or disclosing information about a legal, professionally accepted, and otherwise available medical service. There is little guidance about how to manage COs in ICUs. Objectives: To provide clinicians, hospital administrators, and policymakers with recommendations for managing COs in the critical care setting. Methods: This policy statement was developed by a multidisciplinary expert committee using an iterative process with a diverse working group representing adult medicine, pediatrics, nursing, patient advocacy, bioethics, philosophy, and law. Main Results: The policy recommendations are based on the dual goals of protecting patients' access to medical services and protecting the moral integrity of clinicians. Conceptually, accommodating COs should be considered a "shield " to protect individual clinicians' moral integrity rather than as a "sword" to impose clinicians' judgments on patients. The committee recommends that: (1) COs in ICUs be managed through institutional mechanisms, (2) institutions accommodate COs, provided doing so will not impede a patient's or surrogate's timely access to medical services or information or create excessive hardships for other clinicians or the institution, (3) a clinician's CO to providing potentially inappropriate or futile medical services should not be considered sufficient justification to forgo the treatment against the objections of the patient or surrogate, and (4) institutions promote open moral dialogue and foster a culture that respects diverse values in the critical care setting. Conclusions: This American Thoracic Society statement provides guidance for clinicians, hospital administrators, and policymakers to address clinicians' COs in the critical care setting.

AB - Rationale: Intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians sometimes have a conscientious objection (CO) to providing or disclosing information about a legal, professionally accepted, and otherwise available medical service. There is little guidance about how to manage COs in ICUs. Objectives: To provide clinicians, hospital administrators, and policymakers with recommendations for managing COs in the critical care setting. Methods: This policy statement was developed by a multidisciplinary expert committee using an iterative process with a diverse working group representing adult medicine, pediatrics, nursing, patient advocacy, bioethics, philosophy, and law. Main Results: The policy recommendations are based on the dual goals of protecting patients' access to medical services and protecting the moral integrity of clinicians. Conceptually, accommodating COs should be considered a "shield " to protect individual clinicians' moral integrity rather than as a "sword" to impose clinicians' judgments on patients. The committee recommends that: (1) COs in ICUs be managed through institutional mechanisms, (2) institutions accommodate COs, provided doing so will not impede a patient's or surrogate's timely access to medical services or information or create excessive hardships for other clinicians or the institution, (3) a clinician's CO to providing potentially inappropriate or futile medical services should not be considered sufficient justification to forgo the treatment against the objections of the patient or surrogate, and (4) institutions promote open moral dialogue and foster a culture that respects diverse values in the critical care setting. Conclusions: This American Thoracic Society statement provides guidance for clinicians, hospital administrators, and policymakers to address clinicians' COs in the critical care setting.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84921414837&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84921414837&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1164/rccm.201410-1916ST

DO - 10.1164/rccm.201410-1916ST

M3 - Article

VL - 191

SP - 219

EP - 227

JO - American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

JF - American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

SN - 1073-449X

IS - 2

ER -