[Withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatments in acute oncology situations: History and regulatory aspects in France]. / La « Limitation et/ou arrêt des thérapeutiques ¼ (LAT) en oncologie face à une situation aigüe : historique et aspects réglementaires en France.

The management of oncology patients, especially hospitalized patients, can lead to almost daily discussions regarding therapeutic limitations. Here, we review the history and propose a summary of the texts framing the notion of "withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment" in oncology practice in France. This decision is regulated by the Claeys-Léonetti Law of February 2, 2016 recommending a collegial discussion and its documentation in the medical record. The decision to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatments is the subject of discussion between the patient, his physicians and his family and may take place at any time during his management. The work of intensive-care physicians provides many useful recommendations for acute oncology situations, however articles specific for oncology practice are scarce; this is a topic that oncologists must take up.

The 1960s cervical screening incident at National Women's Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand: insights for screening research, policy making, and practice.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This article examines a cervical screening incident from the 1960s and draws lessons for screening policy. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Concern about harmful overtreatment of symptomless lesions prompted university gynecologist Herbert Green to study, between 1965 and 1970, a 'special series' of 33 women with carcinoma in situ (CIS) who were managed with only limited punch or wedge biopsy. These women were carefully followed up but not treated unless they showed evidence of progression to invasive cancer. This paper examines source documents and subsequent publications in order to ascertain lessons from this incident. RESULTS: In keeping with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration, written consent was not sought. Green published the outcomes for his patients with CIS including the 'special series.' A Judicial inquiry (the Cartwright Inquiry) in 1987 concluded that some women had suffered harm and some had died, but numbers and evidence were not clearly stated. Medical case review for the Inquiry identified 25 women with only punch or wedge biopsy; in 21 of these, there were reasons why no further treatment was given; two had developed cervical cancer, and none were recorded as having died. The case review found eight patients, not necessarily in the 'special series,' who 'in retrospect and by 1987 standards' might have benefited from earlier conisation or hysterectomy. CONCLUSION: Subsequent claims relating to Green's practice have wrongly stated that as many as one hundred women or more had treatment withheld and over 30 died as a result. These claims are inaccurate.

Achieving a person-centered approach to dialysis discontinuation: An historical perspective.

In this essay, we describe the evolution of attitudes toward dialysis discontinuation in historical context, beginning with the birth of outpatient dialysis in the 1960s and continuing through the present. From the start, attitudes toward dialysis discontinuation have reflected the clinical context in which dialysis is initiated. In the 1960s and 1970s, dialysis was only available to select patients and concerns about distributive justice weighed heavily. Because there was strong enthusiasm for new technology and dialysis was regarded as a precious resource not to be wasted, stopping treatment had negative moral connotations and was generally viewed as something to be discouraged. More recently, dialysis has become the default treatment for advanced kidney disease in the United States, leading to concerns about overtreatment and whether patients' values, goals, and preferences are sufficiently integrated into treatment decisions. Despite the developments in palliative nephrology over the past 20 years, dialysis discontinuation remains a conundrum for patients, families, and professionals. While contemporary clinical practice guidelines support a person-centered approach toward stopping dialysis treatments, this often occurs in a crisis when all treatment options have been exhausted. Relatively little is known about the impact of dialysis discontinuation on the experiences of patients and families and there is a paucity of high-quality person-centered evidence to guide practice in this area. Clinicians need better insights into decision-making, symptom burden, and other palliative outcomes that patients might expect when they discontinue dialysis treatments to better support decision-making in this area.

Historical Origins of the Tuskegee Experiment: The Dilemma of Public Health in the United States.

The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male was an observational study on African-American males in Tuskegee, Alabama between 1932 and 1972. The U. S. Public Health Service ran this study on more than 300 people without notifying the participants about their disease nor treating them even after the introduction of penicillin. The study included recording the progress of disease and performing an autopsy on the deaths. This paper explores historical backgrounds enabled this infamous study, and discusses three driving forces behind the Tuskegee Study. First, it is important to understand that the Public Health Service was established in the U. S. Surgeon General's office and was operated as a military organization. Amidst the development of an imperial agenda of the U.S. in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the PHS was responsible for protecting hygiene and the superiority of "the American race" against infectious foreign elements from the borders. The U.S. Army's experience of medical experiments in colonies and abroad was imported back to the country and formed a crucial part of the attitude and philosophy on public health. Secondly, the growing influence of eugenics and racial pathology at the time reinforced discriminative views on minorities. Progressivism was realized in the form of domestic reform and imperial pursuit at the same time. Major medical journals argued that blacks were inclined to have certain defects, especially sexually transmitted diseases like syphilis, because of their prodigal behavior and lack of hygiene. This kind of racial ideas were shared by the PHS officials who were in charge of the Tuskegee Study. Lastly, the PHS officials believed in continuing the experiment regardless of various social changes. They considered that black participants were not only poor but also ignorant of and even unwilling to undergo the treatment. When the exposure of the experiment led to the Senate investigation in 1973, the participating doctors of the PHS maintained that their study offered valuable contribution to the medical research. This paper argues that the combination of the efficiency of military medicine, progressive and imperial racial ideology, and discrimination on African-Americans resulted in the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.

[Untreated syphilis - from Oslo to Tuskegee]. / Ubehandlet syfilis ­ fra Oslo til Tuskegee.

In the period from 1891 - 1910, around 2000 patients with syphilis were admitted to the Department of Dermatology, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet. The head of the department, Cæsar Boeck (1845 - 1917), believed in allowing the disease to take its natural course and withheld treatment. He made detailed notes of the diagnosis and the clinical course of the disease for all his patients. Boeck's material is unique, and forms the basis for our current knowledge about the prognosis and course of syphilis infections. In 1928, the patients were scrutinised by Boeck's successor in the Department of Dermatology, Edvin Bruusgaard (1869 - 1934), and later by Trygve Gjestland (1911 - 1993). Gjestland's doctoral thesis from 1955 has remained as «The Oslo study of untreated syphilis.¼ This article presents a medical historical background for the study. Bruusgaard's and Gjestland's research was important for the Tuskegee Study in the USA, and the Oslo study gave implicit support to this research project, which posterity has emphatically condemned as ethically unacceptable.

Pediatric palliative care and pediatric medical ethics: opportunities and challenges.

The fields of pediatric palliative care (PPC) and pediatric medical ethics (PME) overlap substantially, owing to a variety of historical, cultural, and social factors. This entwined relationship provides opportunities for leveraging the strong communication skills of both sets of providers, as well as the potential for resource sharing and research collaboration. At the same time, the personal and professional relationships between PPC and PME present challenges, including potential conflict with colleagues, perceived or actual bias toward a palliative care perspective in resolving ethical problems, potential delay or underuse of PME services, and a potential undervaluing of the medical expertise required for PPC consultation. We recommend that these challenges be managed by: (1) clearly defining and communicating clinical roles of PPC and PME staff, (2) developing questions that may prompt PPC and PME teams to request consultation from the other service, (3) developing explicit recusal criteria for PPC providers who also provide PME consultation, (4) ensuring that PPC and PME services remain organizationally distinct, and (5) developing well-defined and broad scopes of practice. Overall, the rich relationship between PPC and PME offers substantial opportunities to better serve patients and families facing difficult decisions.

The Tuskegee Syphilis Study and the scientific concept of racial nervous resistance.

In 1932, the U.S. Public Health Service began a study of untreated syphilis among black men in Macon County, Alabama. This project, later known as the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, became one of the most notorious ventures of twentieth-century medicine. Much has been written on it. Historians have suggested that scientific racism strongly influenced the study. But specific links between earlier racial science and the scientific conduct of the study have remained unexplored. The examination in this paper of the concept of a racially determined resistance to syphilis in the nervous system establishes such a link. Discussion of nervous resistance to syphilis appeared in the medical literature in the early twentieth century as a conjecture about the natural inferiority of blacks. White physicians used the concept to interpret racial differences in neurosyphilis as evidence of the rudimentary development of the brain. A small community of African American physicians joined other national experts in syphilis who chose to explain apparent racial differences through alternate mechanisms. But the scientific advisors to the Tuskegee Syphilis Study favored the concept of a racial resistance to neurosyphilis and steered the early design of the study to help to elucidate it. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study was an examination of untreated syphilis, but it also became a demonstration of a putative racial characteristic of syphilis long considered evidence of the natural inferiority of blacks. An examination of the concept of racial nervous resistance and its influence on the research in Macon County helps to define the influence of scientific racism on this notorious medical study.

Care, compassion, or cost: redefining the basis of treatment in ethics and law.

There are in two assumptions inherent in this issue's theme, both inimical to the traditional goals of medicine and to the standards of care it proposed. First, the idea that treatment must be limited for some (but not others) on the basis of cost was born in the early literature of bioethics. Second, that there is a quantifiable and diagnostically predictable period at the "end-of-life" where treatment is "futile," and therefore not worth supporting in a context of scarcity grew out of bioethics's construction of allocative protocols in the 1990s. This paper traces the history of these ideas as constructs grounded in neither natural scarcity nor in firm diagnostic categories. Their relation to issues of care is therefore suspect.