Seattle Children's Hospital Hosts Ethics Conference

According to a press release from the Seattle Children's Hospital yesterday, The Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics at the hospital held their third annual ethics conference.

One of the controversial topics discussed by the ethicists was when a treatment should be considered futile, meaning it has been declared to definitely not work. Medical ethicist Dr. Norman Fost, professor of pediatrics and bioethics, University of Wisconsin, said that there is no true definition of a futile treatment, saying, "The fact that a treatment hasn't been tried or hasn't been successful in the past does not mean it will not be successful in the future. Some medical professionals deem any treatment that has not worked in 100 cases is not viable. Many parents argue a one in 10,000 chance still isn't zero."

Fost also pointed out that the reason ethicists cannot agree on a definition is because it is not a medical judgment, but a personal value judgment. One of the key thing that doctors have to look at is whether or not the patient will gain anything from the treatment. In some cases, it may even be dangerous for a patient to undergo a certain type of treatment.

The press release gives an example of a father of a child with severe neurological damage. The father asks for a specific treatment that the medical community agrees will not work and may put the child at risk. The father decides to bring it to the court, who orders the treatment to be done, since, as the press release mentions, "no U.S. court has ever refused life-sustaining treatment without parental consent."

The issue discussed in the situation is whether or not the doctors should just save them and the court time and money and just treat the child per the father's request.

John J. Paris, SJ, PhD, professor of bioethics, Boston College, responded with, "Is that responsible medical care?" Rev. Paris continued, "We are all going to die. So what is the best way to treat a dying child -- and who decides?" Paris is of the opinion that the treatment should always be in the best interest of the patient.