Do not attempt resuscitation decisions in a cancer centre: addressing difficult ethical and communication issues

Talking to patients about ‘Do Not Attempt Resuscitation’ decisions is difficult for many doctors. Communication about ‘Do Not Attempt Resuscitation’ decisions should occur as part of a wider discussion of treatment goals at an earlier stage in the patient's illness. A doctor should not initiate any treatment, including cardio-pulmonary resuscitation if he/she does not believe it will benefit the patient. An ethical framework is offered which may be of practical help in clarifying decision-making

Competence and consent.

To perform a medical procedure on a competent patient who is refusing it may constitute battery; but to fail to perform a medical procedure on an incompetent patient who is refusing it may constitute negligence. Competence involves being able to understand the consequences of receiving medical treatment, and not receiving it, and being able to make a decision on the basis of that understanding. Competent people can sometimes make imprudent or irrational decisions. Cognitive impairment and mental illness do not necessarily render a person incompetent to consent to investigation and treatment. The suspicion of cognitive impairment or mental illness should prompt a thorough evaluation of competence and mental state. Treatment of incompetent people should be dictated by their best interests, advance directives or substituted judgement

Is there a future for clinical ethics services in Australia?

Clinical ethics refers to the consideration of ethical issues arising directly in the context of patient care. Health professionals are generally adept at effectively and sensitively managing ethical issues in clinical care. However, in some settings, multidisciplinary clinical ethics services may enhance clinical practice by assisting clinicians, patients and others to identify, understand and manage ethical issues. Clinical ethics services may be particularly valuable for situations in which moral perspectives diverge or communication has deteriorated. Such services may facilitate discussion and help the parties find mutually satisfactory solutions. Clinical ethics services may take various forms, including clinical ethics committees, ethics consultants, patient advocates or other mechanisms for responding to complaints and grievances. There is considerable disagreement about key aspects of clinical ethics services, including who should conduct them, how they should be run and what role they should play in decision-making

Is there a future for clinical ethics services in Australia?

Clinical ethics refers to the consideration of ethical issues arising directly in the context of patient care. Health professionals are generally adept at effectively and sensitively managing ethical issues in clinical care. However, in some settings, multidisciplinary clinical ethics services may enhance clinical practice by assisting clinicians, patients and others to identify, understand and manage ethical issues. Clinical ethics services may be particularly valuable for situations in which moral perspectives diverge or communication has deteriorated. Such services may facilitate discussion and help the parties find mutually satisfactory solutions. Clinical ethics services may take various forms, including clinical ethics committees, ethics consultants, patient advocates or other mechanisms for responding to complaints and grievances. There is considerable disagreement about key aspects of clinical ethics services, including who should conduct them, how they should be run and what role they should play in decision-making

How shortcomings in the mental health system affect the use of involuntary community treatment orders

© AHHA 2017. Objective The aim of the present study was to examine stakeholder perspectives on how the operation of the mental health system affects the use of involuntary community treatment orders (CTOs). Methods A qualitative study was performed, consisting of semi-structured interviews about CTO experiences with 38 purposively selected participants in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Participants included mental health consumers (n≤5), carers (n≤6), clinicians (n≤15) and members of the Mental Health Review Tribunal of NSW (n≤12). Data were analysed using established qualitative methodologies. Results Analysis of participant accounts about CTOs and their role within the mental health system identified two key themes, namely that: (1) CTOs are used to increase access to services; and (2) CTOs cannot remedy non-existent or inadequate services. Conclusion The findings of the present study indicate that deficiencies in health service structures and resourcing are a significant factor in CTO use. This raises questions about policy accountability for mental health services (both voluntary and involuntary), as well as about the usefulness of CTOs, justifications for CTO use and the legal criteria regulating CTO implementation. What is known about this topic? Following the deinstitutionalisation of psychiatric services over recent decades, community settings are increasingly the focus for the delivery of mental health services to people living with severe and persistent mental illnesses. The rates of use of involuntary treatment in Australian community settings (under CTOs) vary between state and territory jurisdictions and are high by world standards; however, the reasons for variation in rates of CTO use are not well understood. What does this paper add? This paper provides an empirical basis for a link between the politics of mental health and the uptake and usefulness of CTOs. What are the implications for practitioners? This paper makes explicit the real-world demands on the mental health system and how service deficiencies are a significant determinant in the use of CTOs. Practitioners and policy makers need to be candid about system limitations and how they factor in clinical and legal justifications for using involuntary treatment. The results of the present study provide data to support advocacy to improve policy accountability and resourcing of community mental health services