Health Care Decision-Making and the “F” Word—Futility

I am pleased to be a part of this upcoming webinar from the American Bar Association: "Health Care Decision-Making and the “F” Word—Futility."



Wednesday, April 23, 2014, from 1:00 – 2:30 Eastern time

• Phone: 800-285-2221 and select option “2”


• Online: http://apps.americanbar.org/cle/programs/t14mfh1.html


• Event code: CET4MFH

Recent cases involving brain dead patients and resulting disputes over continuing organ-sustaining treatments have reignited debate over the appropriate use of medical technologies. The family of Jahi McMath in Oakland, CA, fought to keep their daughter connected to a ventilator, while a hospital in Fort Worth, TX, sought to keep Marlise Muñoz, fourteen weeks pregnant, on a ventilator over the objection of her husband and family. For terminally ill patients who are not brain dead, a family's desire to "do everything possible" sometimes leads to insisting on medical interventions that medical professionals may deem inappropriate or "futile."  



This program will:

• Provide you with an understanding of the range of policy and practice issues concerning medical futility


• Enable you to be accurate and supportive in counseling clients on these issues in the context of advance planning


• Enable you to be more effective in counseling and dispute resolution when conflicts arise in end-of-life decision-making concerning the limits of care


• The focus is not on litigation.  

Faculty:

• Robert L. Fine, MD, FACP, FAAHPM, Clinical Director, Office of Clinical Ethics and Palliative Care, Baylor Health Care System, Dallas, TX


• Bernard "Bud" Hammes, Ph.D, Director of Medical Humanities, Gundersen Lutheran Medical Foundation, La Crosse, WI


• Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD, Director, Health Law Institute & Associate Professor of Law, Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, MN


• Charles P. Sabatino, JD (Moderator), Director, ABA Commission on Law and Aging, Washington, DC

Read More

Medical Futility at Yale

I am speaking at Yale Medicine and at Yale Law later this month.  One of the talks is on medical futility.  So, I started brushing up on the local statutory and judicial landscape.  Boy was I surprised to find so many litigated medical futility cases in such a small state.  And the most recent one is against Yale itself.



In late 2013, in a 15-page written memorandum, a Superior Court denied Yale's motion to dismiss an intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) claim brought by the family of Helen Marsala.  



The family alleges that clinicians removed her ventilator without consent and over their objections.  The court ruled that a jury could find that "terminating a patient's life support with an awareness of her contrary wishes constitutes unacceptable behavior and would readily be considered extreme and outrageous."



Moreover, while completely unnecessary on a motion to dismiss (and this pure dicta), the court strongly indicated that the hospital would not qualify for civil immunity under Connecticut's 1991 statutory immunity section.

Read More