Advanced

Ethical considerations of refusing nutrition after stroke

Sandman, Lars; Bolmsjö, Ingrid LU and Westergren, Albert LU (2008) In Nursing Ethics 15(2). p.147-159
Abstract
The aim of this article is to analyse and discuss the ethically problematic conflict raised by patients with stroke who refuse nutritional treatment. In analysing this conflict, the focus is on four different aspects: (1) Is nutritional treatment biologically necessary? (2) If necessary, is the reason for refusal a functional disability, lack of appetite or motivation, misunderstanding of the situation or a genuine conflict of values? (3) If the latter, what values are involved in the conflict? (4) How should we deal with the different kinds of refusal of nutritional treatment? We argue that patients' autonomy should be respected as far as possible, while also considering that those who have suffered a stroke might re-evaluate their life... (More)
The aim of this article is to analyse and discuss the ethically problematic conflict raised by patients with stroke who refuse nutritional treatment. In analysing this conflict, the focus is on four different aspects: (1) Is nutritional treatment biologically necessary? (2) If necessary, is the reason for refusal a functional disability, lack of appetite or motivation, misunderstanding of the situation or a genuine conflict of values? (3) If the latter, what values are involved in the conflict? (4) How should we deal with the different kinds of refusal of nutritional treatment? We argue that patients' autonomy should be respected as far as possible, while also considering that those who have suffered a stroke might re-evaluate their life as a result of a beneficial prognosis. However, if patients persist with their refusal, health care professionals should force nutritional treatment only when it is clear that the patients will re-evaluate their future life. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
stroke, refusal, nutrition, autonomy, ethics
in
Nursing Ethics
volume
15
issue
2
pages
147 - 159
publisher
SAGE Publications Inc.
external identifiers
  • wos:000254220000003
  • scopus:40549120365
ISSN
1477-0989
DOI
10.1177/0969733007086013
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
0b81959e-fd26-49bf-b752-7fcc4b612ada (old id 1184867)
date added to LUP
2008-09-02 13:59:49
date last changed
2017-01-01 04:32:05
@article{0b81959e-fd26-49bf-b752-7fcc4b612ada,
  abstract     = {The aim of this article is to analyse and discuss the ethically problematic conflict raised by patients with stroke who refuse nutritional treatment. In analysing this conflict, the focus is on four different aspects: (1) Is nutritional treatment biologically necessary? (2) If necessary, is the reason for refusal a functional disability, lack of appetite or motivation, misunderstanding of the situation or a genuine conflict of values? (3) If the latter, what values are involved in the conflict? (4) How should we deal with the different kinds of refusal of nutritional treatment? We argue that patients' autonomy should be respected as far as possible, while also considering that those who have suffered a stroke might re-evaluate their life as a result of a beneficial prognosis. However, if patients persist with their refusal, health care professionals should force nutritional treatment only when it is clear that the patients will re-evaluate their future life.},
  author       = {Sandman, Lars and Bolmsjö, Ingrid and Westergren, Albert},
  issn         = {1477-0989},
  keyword      = {stroke,refusal,nutrition,autonomy,ethics},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {147--159},
  publisher    = {SAGE Publications Inc.},
  series       = {Nursing Ethics},
  title        = {Ethical considerations of refusing nutrition after stroke},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969733007086013},
  volume       = {15},
  year         = {2008},
}