Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Am J Bioeth. 2018 Aug;18(8):20-31. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2018.1485758.

When Parents Refuse: Resolving Entrenched Disagreements Between Parents and Clinicians in Situations of Uncertainty and Complexity.

Author information

1
a University of Otago Bioethics Centre and Otago Community Hospice.

Abstract

When shared decision making breaks down and parents and medical providers have developed entrenched and conflicting views, ethical frameworks are needed to find a way forward. This article reviews the evolution of thought about the best interest standard and then discusses the advantages of the harm principle (HP) and the zone of parental discretion (ZPD). Applying these frameworks to parental refusals in situations of complexity and uncertainty presents challenges that necessitate concrete substeps to analyze the big picture and identify key questions. I outline and defend a new decision-making tool that includes three parts: identifying the nature of the disagreement, checklists for key elements of the HP and ZPD, and a "think list" of specific questions designed to enhance use of the HP and ZPD in clinical decision making. These tools together will assist those embroiled in complex disagreements to disentangle the issues to find a path to resolution.

KEYWORDS:

children and families; decision making; parental refusals; pediatrics; risk/benefit analysis

Supplemental Content

Loading ...
Support Center