Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
Ann Fr Anesth Reanim ; 33(2): 128-34, 2014 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24462574

RESUMO

French law allows organ donation after death due to cardiocirculatory arrest. In the Maastricht classification, type III non-heart-beating donors are those who experience cardiocirculatory arrest after the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments. French authorities in charge of regulating organ donation (Agence de la Biomédecine, ABM) are considering organ collection from Maastricht type III donors. We describe a scenario for Maastricht type III organ donation that fully complies with the ethical norms governing care to dying patients. That organ donation may occur after death should have no impact on the care given to the patient and family. The dead-donor rule must be followed scrupulously: the organ retrieval procedure must neither cause nor hasten death. The decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatments, withdrawal modalities, and care provided to the patient and family must adhere strictly to the requirements set forth in patient-rights legislation (the 2005 Léonetti law in France) and should not be influenced in any way by the possibility of organ donation. A major ethical issue regarding the family is how best to transition from discussing treatment-withdrawal decisions to discussing possible organ retrieval for donation should the patient die rapidly after treatment withdrawal. Close cooperation between the healthcare team and the organ retrieval team is crucial to minimize the distress of family members during this transition. Modalities for implementing Maastricht type III organ donation are discussed here, including the best location for withdrawing life-sustaining treatments (operating room or intensive care unit).


Assuntos
Cuidados Críticos , Comissão de Ética , Parada Cardíaca , Sociedades Médicas , Assistência Terminal/ética , Doadores de Tecidos/classificação , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos/ética , Extubação , Atitude Frente a Saúde , Morte Encefálica , Conflito de Interesses , Morte , Dissidências e Disputas , França , Humanos , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente , Relações Profissional-Família , Prognóstico , Assistência Terminal/legislação & jurisprudência , Assistência Terminal/normas , Consentimento do Representante Legal , Coleta de Tecidos e Órgãos/legislação & jurisprudência , Coleta de Tecidos e Órgãos/métodos , Coleta de Tecidos e Órgãos/normas , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos/legislação & jurisprudência , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos/normas , Suspensão de Tratamento/legislação & jurisprudência
3.
Ann Fr Anesth Reanim ; 31(9): 694-703, 2012 Sep.
Artigo em Francês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22922010

RESUMO

CONTEXT: Management of the end of life is a major social issue which was addressed in France by law, on April 22nd 2005. Nevertheless, a debate has emerged within French society about the legalization of euthanasia and/or assisted suicide (E/AS). This issue raises questions for doctors and most especially for anesthetists and intensive care physicians. OBJECTIVE: To highlight, dispassionately and without dogmatism, key points taken from the published literature and the experience of countries which have legislated for E/AS. RESULTS: The current French law addresses most of the end of life issues an intensive care physician might encounter. It is credited for imposing palliative care when therapies have become senseless and are withdrawn. However, this requirement for palliative care is generally applied too late in the course of a fatal illness. There is a great need for more education and stronger incentives for early action in this area. On the rare occasions when E/AS is requested, either by the patient or their loved-ones, it often results from a failure to consider that treatments have become senseless and conflict with patient's best interest. The implementation of E/AS cannot be reduced to a simple affirmation of the Principle of autonomy. Such procedures present genuine difficulties and the risk of drift. CONCLUSION: We deliver a message of prudence and caution. Should we address painful end of life and moral suffering issues, by suppressing the subject, i.e. ending the patient's life, when comprehensive palliative care has not first been fully granted to all patients in need of it ?


Assuntos
Anestesiologia/ética , Eutanásia/ética , Cuidados Paliativos/ética , Suicídio Assistido/ética , Anestesiologia/legislação & jurisprudência , Cuidados Críticos/ética , Comissão de Ética , Europa (Continente) , Eutanásia/legislação & jurisprudência , Família , França , Humanos , Legislação Médica , Oregon , Cuidados Paliativos/legislação & jurisprudência , Médicos , Sociedades Médicas , Suicídio Assistido/legislação & jurisprudência , Assistência Terminal/ética
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...