Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumInformed Consent and Refusal of Care

A 34-year-old woman is brought to the emergency department after a high-speed motor vehicle collision. She has sustained a crushed pelvis and massive intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Her blood pressure is 70/40 mm Hg and heart rate is 142/min. The patient is obtunded, unable to communicate, and lacks decision-making capacity. Her husband arrives shortly after and informs the medical team that he and his wife are devout Jehovah's Witnesses. He emphatically refuses the administration of any blood products on her behalf. While gathering the patient's identification, the trauma nurse discovers a legally valid, signed, and witnessed advance directive in her wallet, dated 4 months ago. The document explicitly states: "I no longer practice the Jehovah's Witness faith. I consent to all necessary life-saving medical treatments, including blood transfusions. My family is unaware of my decision." Which of the following is the most appropriate next step in management?

  1. A
    Withhold blood products in accordance with the surrogate decision-maker's refusal
  2. B
    Disclose the advance directive to the husband and ask him to reconsider his refusal
  3. Administer blood products immediately as authorized by the advance directiveAnswer
  4. D
    Delay transfusion until an urgent hospital ethics committee review is conducted
  5. E
    Administer only intravenous crystalloid fluids until an emergency court order is obtained

Answer

Administer blood products immediately as authorized by the advance directive
The most appropriate next step is to administer blood products immediately. The core ethical principle of respect for autonomy dictates that a patient's own explicit, documented wishes must guide their medical care when they lose decision-making capacity. An advance directive is a legally binding document designed specifically to provide this guidance. In this scenario, the patient's written directive explicitly authorizes blood transfusions and supersedes the refusal of her husband. Even though the husband is the default surrogate decision-maker, his authority is limited to applying the patient's known wishes (substituted judgment). Because his decision directly contradicts her written directive, the medical team has a legal and ethical obligation to follow the document and provide life-saving care without delay.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Assess the patient's clinical stability and decision-making capacity.
The patient is hemodynamically unstable, obtunded, and lacks decision-making capacity.
Determines whether the patient can provide informed consent directly or if a surrogate/directive is needed.
2
Identify the legally authorized decision-maker or guiding document.
There is a conflict between the husband's refusal as a surrogate and the patient's own written advance directive.
Establishes the legal basis for providing or withholding life-saving treatment.
3
Apply ethical principles to resolve the conflict.
The advance directive supersedes the husband's refusal because it represents the patient's own autonomous, documented wishes.
Patient autonomy is paramount; surrogates must use substituted judgment, which cannot override the patient's explicit written directives.

Key Concept

A valid advance directive represents a patient's autonomous wishes and legally supersedes conflicting decisions made by a surrogate decision-maker.
Rate this question

Topics

Informed Consent and Refusal of Care

More questions from this topic