Abstract
Objective:
The objective of this study was to examine whether patient selection or triage requires placing a relative value on human lives and whether the values placed on these lives are consistent with current ethical theories.
Study Design:
An anonymous questionnaire was administered to groups of physicians and students in Montreal. It presented eight currently incompetent patients with potential neurological sequelae requiring emergency care. Predicted outcomes were explicitly described. Four patients had a predicted 50% survival and a 50% chance of impairment; they were a preterm and a term neonate, a 2-month-old and a 50-year-old. Two already disabled patients, a 7-year-old and an 80-year-old, had 50% predicted survival. A 14-year-old and a 35-year-old had 5% survival, but differing impairment.Respondents were asked if they would resuscitate and in what order they would resuscitate if all needed intervention simultaneously.
Result:
Eighty-five percent response rate, n=524. The proportion stating they would always resuscitate was smallest for the 80-year-old (18% P<0.001 compared to other patients), then the preterm (35%, P<0.001), then the term and the 50-year-old (53 and 58%, P<0.01). The 2-month-old and the 7-year-old would be resuscitated most frequently (74 and 77%, P<0.01), followed by the patients with 5% survival (64 and 68%, P<0.001). The median order of triage was first the 2-month-old, followed by the 7-year-old, the 14-year-old, the term newborn, the 50-year-old, the 35-year-old, the premature newborn and the 80-year-old.
Conclusion:
Order of resuscitation was not closely related to the predicted survival, impairment or potential life years gained. Age appeared to have a strong influence, with children's lives being valued more than the adults’. This tendency was reversed for the newborn infants who were undervalued compared with older children, and most particularly for the premature. The value placed on the life of newborns, in particular the premature, is less than that expected by any objective medical data and was not consistent with any ethical theory that we tested.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Waring DR . Tragic decisions. In: Medical Benefit and the Human Lottery: An Egalitarian Approach to Patient Selection. Springer: Toronto, Canada, 2004, pp 1–12.
Kilner JF . Who lives? Who dies? Ethical Criteria in Patient Selection. Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, 1990 198–199.
Evans RW . Health care technology and the inevitability of resource allocation decisions, part II. JAMA 1983; 249: 2209.
Daniels N . Four unsolved rationing problems: a challenge. Hastings Cent Rep 1994; 24: 27–29.
Childress JF . Who Shall Live When not all Can Live? Practical Reasoning in Bioethics. Indiana University Press: Bloomington, IN, 1997 69–180.
Harris J . QALYfying the value of life. Med Ethics 1987; 13: 117–123.
Singer P, McKie J, Kuhse H, Richardson J . Double jeopardy, the equal value of lives and the veil of ignorance: a rejoinder to Harris. J Med Ethics 1996; 22: 205.
Veatch RM . The ethics of resource allocation in critical care. Crit Care Clinics 1986; 2: 73–89.
Childress JF . Triage in the neonatal intensive care unit. In: Practical Reasoning in Bioethics. Indiana University Press: Bloomington, IN, 1997, pp 193–213.
Waring DR . A threshold level of medical benefit. In: Medical Benefit and the Human Lottery: An Egalitarian Approach to Patient Selection. Springer: Toronto, Canada, 2004 pp 133–147.
Rescher N . The allocation of exotic medical lifesaving therapy. In: Munson R (ed). Intervention and Reflection: Basic Issues in Medical Ethics. Wadsworth Publishing Co.: New York, NY, 1996, pp 578–581.
Waring DR . Patient selection and medical utility. In: Medical Benefit and the Human Lottery: An Egalitarian Approach to Patient Selection. Springer: Toronto, Canada, 2004, pp 13–27.
Janvier A, Leblanc I, Barrington K . The best-interest standard is not applied for neonatal resuscitation decisions. Pediatrics 2008; 121: 963–969.
Harris J . More and better justice. In: Bell JM, Mendes S (eds). Philosophy and Medical Welfare, Royal Institute of Philosophy Lecture Series 23: Supplement to Philosophy 1988. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, 1988, p 83.
Harris J . Justice and equal opportunities in health care. Bioethics 1999; 13: 399–403.
Waring DR . Waiting lists and lotteries in practice. In: Medical Benefit and the Human Lottery: An Egalitarian Approach to Patient Selection. Springer: Toronto, Canada, 2004, pp 153–167.
Doyle LW, the Victorian Infant Collaborative Study Group. Evaluation of neonatal intensive care for extremely low birth weight infants in Victoria over two decades: II. Efficiency. Pediatrics 2004; 113 (3): 510–514.
Daniels N . Am I My Parents’ Keeper? An Essay on Justice between the Young and the Old. Oxford University Press: Oxford, England, 1988.
Veatch RM . Justice and Valuing Lives. In Life Span: Values and Life-Extending Technologies. Harper and Row: New York, NY, 1979 218.
Waring DR . The comparative value of lives. In: Medical Benefit and the Human Lottery: An Egalitarian Approach to Patient Selection. Springer: Toronto, Canada, 2004, pp 33–49.
McKneally MF, Dickens BM, Meslin EM, Singer PA . Bioethics for clinicians: 13 resource allocation. CMAJ 1997; 157: 163–167.
The fetus as a person. CMAJ 1990; 143: 1156 (no authors listed).
Burkhart J . The social construction of personhood. Soc Thought 1989; 15: 2–13.
Singer P . Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, 1979 137.
Engelhardt HT . Ethical issues in aiding the death of young children. In: Kohl M (ed). Beneficent Euthanasia. Prometheus: Buffalo, NY, 1975.
Tooley M . Personhood. In: Singer P, Kuhse H (eds). A Companion to Bioethics. Blackwell Publishers: Oxford, England, 1998, pp 117–126.
Engelhardt HT . The many faces of autonomy. Health Care Anal 2001; 9: 283–297.
Médecine sous influence. Moreno LB Producer, National Film Board of Canada. 2004.
Miracle Baby grows up. Grange R Producer, BBC Panorama series (Transcript accessed on arpil3 2007 at http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/programmes/panorama/transcripts/miraclebabygrowsup.txt).
Waring D . Fair Innings and need over lifetime. In: Medical Benefit and the Human Lottery: An Egalitarian Approach to Patient Selection. Springer: Toronto, Canada, 2004, pp 89–97.
Janvier A, Bauer KL, Lantos JD . Are newborns morally different from older children? Theor Med Bioeth 2007; 28 (5): 413–425.
Zweibel NR, Cassel CK, Karrison T . Public attitudes about the use of chronological age as a criterion for allocating health care resources. Gerontologist 1993; 33: 74–80.
Callahan D . Setting Limits: Medical Goals for an Aging Society. Simon and Schuster: New York, NY, 1987 17.
Jahnigen DW, Binstock RH . Economic and clinical realities: heath care for elderly people. In: Binstock RH, Post SG (eds). Too Old for Health Care? Controversies in Medicine, Law, Economics, and Ethics. The Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, 1991, p 17.
Kamm F . Précis of morality, mortality, vol. 1: death and whom to save from it. Philos Phenomenal Res 1998; 58: 943–944.
Childress JF . Ensuring care, respect, and fairness for the elderly. Hastings Cent Rep 1984; 14: 28–29.
Griffin J . Well-Being: Its Meaning, Measurement, and Moral Importance. Clarendon Press: Oxford England, 1986.
Waring DR . An egalitarian ethos. In: Medical Benefit and the Human Lottery: An Egalitarian Approach to Patient Selection. Springer: Toronto, Canada, 2004, pp 115–131.
Danish council of ethics, Extreme prematurity, ethical aspects. 1995.
Swiss Society of Neonatologists, Guidelines. Recommendation for the care of infants born at the limit of viability (GA 22–26 weeks) (accessed April 3, 2007 at http://www.neonet.ch/assets/doc/Infants_born_at_the_limit_of_viability_-_english_final.pdf).
Salle B, Sureau C . Le préma de moins de 28 SA, sa réanimation et son avenir. Rapport de l’académie de médecine, 2006, saisie dans sa séance du mardi 20 juin 2006 (accessed April 3 2007 at http://www.academie-medecine.fr/upload/base//rapports_289_fichier_lie.rtf).
Nuffield council on bioethics. Critical care decisions in fetal and neonatal medicine: ethical issues, England 2006 (Accessed April 3 2007 at http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/go/ourwork/prolonginglife/publication_406.html).
Committee of Fetus and Newborn of the Canadian Pediatric Society, and the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Management of the woman with threatened birth of an infant of extremely low gestational age. Can Med Assoc J 1994; 151 (5): 547–551.
Sherlock RL, Anderson PJ, Doyle LW . Neurodevelopmental sequelae of intraventricular haemorrhage at 8 years of age in a regional cohort of ELBW/very preterm infants. Early Hum Dev 2005; 81: 909–916.
Serenius F, Ewald U, Farooqi A, Holmgren PA, Hakansson S, Sedin G . Short-term outcome after active perinatal management at 23–25 weeks of gestation. A study from two Swedish tertiary care centers. Part 2: infant survival. Acta Paediatr 2004; 93: 1081–1089.
Lefebvre F, Mazurier E, Tessier R . Cognitive and educational outcomes in early adulthood for infants weighing 1000 grams or less at birth. Acta Paediatr 2005; 94: 733–740.
Lorenz JM, Wooliever DE, Jetton JR, Paneth N . A quantitative review of mortality and developmental disability in extremely premature newborn. Arch Pediatr Adeolesc Med 1998; 152: 425–435.
Lorenz JM . The outcome of extreme prematurity. Semin Perinatol 2001; 25: 348–359.
Hintz SR, Kendrick DE, Vohr BR, Poole WK, Higgins RD, for the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network. Changes in Neurodevelopmental Outcomes at 18 to 22 Months’ Corrected Age Among Infants of Less Than 25 Weeks’ Gestational Age Born in 1993–1999. Pediatrics 2005; 115: 1645–1651.
Canadian Neonatal Network 2005 annual report (Accessed April 2, 2007 at http://www.canadianneonatalnetwork.org/Doc/2005.pdf).
American Academy of Medicine, code of medical ethics (Accessed April 2, 2007 at http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/2498.html).
Canadian Medical Association. Code of Ethics. CMAJ 1996; 155: 1776A–1776B.
Acknowledgements
We had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Disclaimer
There are no conflicts of interest to report.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Janvier, A., Leblanc, I. & Barrington, K. Nobody likes premies: the relative value of patients’ lives. J Perinatol 28, 821–826 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2008.103
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2008.103
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Elternzentrierte ethische Entscheidungsfindung für Frühgeborene im Grenzbereich der Lebensfähigkeit – Reflexion über die Bedeutung probabilistischer Prognosen als Entscheidungsgrundlage
Ethik in der Medizin (2022)
-
Are we measuring the same health constructs? Amazon’s Mechanical Turk versus a community sample
Current Psychology (2022)
-
Optimism bias in understanding neonatal prognoses
Journal of Perinatology (2021)
-
Differing Thresholds for Overriding Parental Refusals of Life-Sustaining Treatment
HEC Forum (2020)
-
International variations in application of the best-interest standard across the age spectrum
Journal of Perinatology (2017)