Responding to a Non-Imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation

Kelsey Gipe
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0963180124000173
2024-03-27
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
Abstract:Based on Nathan Goldstein's case report, "But I have a pacer...there is no point in engaging in hypothetical scenarios": A Non-imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation, it is reasonable to conclude that it was, all-things-considered, ethically appropriate to grant the patient's request to deactivate her pacemaker. Philosophically, and as a clinical bioethicist, I support the team's decision to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation. However, it is worth exploring a bit further whether the distress on the part of the outside hospital's ethics committee and providers—who declined to honor the patient's request for pacemaker deactivation—may actually track something of moral significance. Might their discomfort around deactivation be "truth-tracking" in moral terms?
social sciences, biomedical,health care sciences & services,health policy & services
What problem does this paper attempt to address?