Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate how neurologists approach situations in which families request prolonged organ support after declaration of death by neurologic criteria (DNC). METHODS: We surveyed 938 members of the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) who treat critically ill patients, including 50% who practice in states with accommodation exceptions (states that require religious or moral beliefs to be taken into consideration when declaring death or discontinuing organ support: California, Illinois, New Jersey, New York), and 50% who practice in nonaccommodation states. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 201/938 individuals (21% response rate), 96 of whom were from accommodation states and 105 of whom were from nonaccommodation states. Both groups reported encountering situations in which families requested continuation of organ support after DNC (48% from accommodation states and 46% from nonaccommodation states). In a hypothetical scenario where a request is made to continue organ support after DNC (outside of organ donation), 48% of respondents indicated they would continue support due to fear of litigation. In reply to an open-ended question, respondents requested that the AAN generate guidelines and advocate to codify laws regarding organ support after DNC, and to improve public and physician education on DNC. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that it is relatively common for neurologists who treat critically ill patients to encounter families who object to discontinuation of organ support after DNC at some point during their career. It would be beneficial for physicians, families, and society to rely on clear medicolegal guidelines on management of this situation.

The United States health-care expenditure is rising precipitously. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that, in 2025, at our current rate of increased spending, 25% of the gross domestic product will be allocated to health care. Our per-capita spending on health care also far exceeds that of any other industrialized country. Health-care costs must be addressed if our country is to remain competitive in the global marketplace and to maintain its financial solvency. If unchecked, the uncontrolled rise in health-care expenditures will not only affect our capacity to provide our patients with high-quality care but also threaten the ability of our nation to compete economically on the global stage. This is not hyperbole but fiscal reality.As physicians, we are becoming increasingly familiar with the economics impacting health-care policy. Thus, we are in a unique position to control the cost of health care. This includes an increased reliance on creating and adhering to evidence-based guidelines. We can do this and still continue to respect the primacy of patient welfare and the right of patients to act in their own self-interest. However, as evidenced by the use of high-volume centers of excellence, each strategy adapted to control costs must be vetted and must be monitored for its unintended ethical consequences.The solution to this complex problem must involve the input of all of the health-care stakeholders, including the patients, payers, and providers. Physicians ought to play a role in designing and executing a remedy. After all, we are the ones who best understand medicine and whose moral obligation is to the welfare of our patients.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to evaluate the caliber of education mainstream media provides the public about brain death. METHODS: We reviewed articles published prior to July 31, 2015 on the most shared/heavily trafficked mainstream media websites of 2014 using the names of patients from two highly publicized brain death cases, 'Jahi McMath' and 'Marlise Munoz.' RESULTS: We reviewed 208 unique articles. The subject was referred to as being 'alive' or on 'life support' in 72% (149) of the articles, 97% (144) of which also described the subject as being brain dead. A definition of brain death was provided in 4% (9) of the articles. Only 7% (14) of the articles noted that organ support should be discontinued after brain death declaration unless a family has agreed to organ donation. Reference was made to well-known cases of patients in persistent vegetative states in 16% (34) of articles and 47% (16) of these implied both patients were in the same clinical state. CONCLUSIONS: Mainstream media provides poor education to the public on brain death. Because public understanding of brain death impacts organ and tissue donation, it is important for physicians, organ procurement organizations, and transplant coordinators to improve public education on this topic

Bioethics has become a common course of study in medical schools, other health professional schools, and graduate and undergraduate programs. An analysis of past ethical scandals, as well as the bioethics apparatus that emerged in response to them, is often central to the discussion of bioethical questions. This historical perspective on bioethics is invaluable and demonstrates how, for example, the infamous Tuskegee syphilis study was inherently racist and how other experiments exploited mentally disabled and other disadvantaged persons. However, such instruction can resemble so-called Whig history, in which a supposedly more enlightened mindset is seen as having replaced the "bad old days" of physicians behaving immorally. Bioethical discourse-both in the classroom and in practice-should be accompanied by efforts to historicize but not minimize past ethical transgressions. That is, bioethics needs to emphasize why and how such events occurred rather than merely condemning them with an air of moral superiority. Such instruction can reveal the complicated historical circumstances that led physician-researchers (some of whom were actually quite progressive in their thinking) to embark on projects that seem so unethical in hindsight. Such an approach is not meant to exonerate past transgressions but rather to explain them. In this manner, students and practitioners of bioethics can better appreciate how modern health professionals may be susceptible to the same types of pressures, misguided thinking, and conflicts of interest that sometimes led their predecessors astray.