Ethics seminars: the ethical debate on practicing procedures on the newly dead.

Emergency medicine and its academic teaching programs face an ethical dilemma surrounding the question of practicing procedures on the newly dead. For many years, procedures have been practiced on the newly dead, but few institutions have had policies addressing the practice. This article considers the ethical arguments both for and against practicing procedures on the newly dead without consent, reviews the empirical studies on the subject, and presents the positions of other professional societies, before concluding with the position of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM). SAEM strongly encourages all emergency medicine training programs to develop a policy and make that policy available to the institution, educators, trainees, and the public. The practice should not occur behind closed doors or on an ad hoc basis without clearly articulated guidelines. With improvements in technology, including patient simulation and virtual reality, the need for the practice may decrease, but there is no current evidence that is compelling regarding the best methods of teaching procedural skills. Given the importance of protecting trust in the profession of medicine and the existing evidence that the public would expect that consent be obtained, SAEM recommends that families be asked for consent prior to practicing procedures on the newly dead.

Confronting the ethical challenges to informed consent in emergency medicine research.

The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine believes that protection of human subjects is vital in emergency medicine research and that, whenever feasible, informed consent is at the heart of that protection. At the same time, the emergency setting presents unique barriers to informed consent both because of the time frame in which the research is performed and because patients in the emergency department are a vulnerable population. This report reviews the concept of informed consent, empirical data on patients' cognitive abilities during an emergency, the federal rules allowing exemption from consent under certain circumstances, issues surrounding consent forms, and the new Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations as they relate to research. The authors conclude that, in many circumstances, informed consent is possible if the researcher is diligent and takes time to adequately explain the study to the potential subject. In cases in which it is possible to obtain consent, precautions must be taken to ensure that subjects have decision-making capacity and are offered time to have their questions answered and their needs met. Sometimes resuscitation and other emergency medicine research must be conducted without the ability to obtain consent. In these cases, special protections of subjects under the exception from consent guidelines must be followed. Protection of research subjects is the responsibility of every researcher in emergency medicine.