FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 337:1477 November 13, 1997 Number 20 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited Related Article by Casarett, D. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: Casarett and Ross (June 26 issue)¹ ignore an important ethical principle that argues for resuscitation of a patient who has had an iatrogenic cardiopulmonary arrest — the principle of patient autonomy. The wishes of the patient were presumably followed in placing the initial do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order, which should have been the result of an informed decision-making process. DNR orders are best used to allow patients to make decisions about refusal of treatment for a foreseeable event.² An iatrogenic arrest is not usually included in the range of events anticipated by patients when they ask for or agree . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Berlin, F. S., Walker, W. E., Levine, K. M., Phibbs, B. P. (1998). Unpaid Expert Witnesses. NEJM 338: 1233-1235 [Full Text]