Where angels fear to tread: Proxy consent and novel technologies

References

• Fins JJ. Constructing and ethical stereotaxy for severe brain injuries: Balancing risks, benefits and access. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2003; 4: 323–327
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laureys S, Boly M. What is it like to be vegetative or minimally conscious?. Current Opinion in Neurology 2007; 20: 609–613
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giacino JT, Ashwal S, Childs N, Cranford R, Jennett B, Katz DI, Kelly JP, Rosenberg JH, Whyte J, Zafonte RD, Zasler ND. The minimally conscious state: Definition and diagnostic criteria. Neurology 2002; 58: 349–353
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiff ND. Modeling the minimally conscious state: Measurements of brain function and therapeutic possibilities. Progress in Brain Research 2005; 150: 473–493
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fins JJ. A proposed ethical framework for interventional cognitive neuroscience: A consideration of deep brain stimulation in impaired consciousness. Neurological Research 2000; 22: 273–278
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whyte J. Treatments to enhance recovery from the vegetative and minimally conscious states: Ethical issues surrounding efficacy studies. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2007; 86: 86–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giacino J, Whyte J. The vegetative and minimally conscious states: Current knowledge and remaining questions. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2006; 20: 30–50
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laureys S, Giacino JT, Schiff ND, Schabus M, Owen AM. How should functional imaging of patients with disorders of consciousness contribute to their clinical rehabilitation needs?. Current Opinion in Neurology 2006; 19: 520–527
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fins JJ. Being conscious of their burden: Severe brain injury and the two cultures challenge. Disorders of Consciousness: Annals of the New York Academy of Science 2009; 1157: 131–147
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drazen JM. Using every resource to care for our casualties. New England Journal of Medicine 2005; 352: 2121
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen AM, Coleman MR, Boly M, Davis MH, Laureys S, Pickard JD. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging to detect covert awareness in the vegetative state. Archives of Neurology 2007; 64: 1098–1102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenberg JB. Schiavo on the cutting edge: Functional brain imaging and its impact on surrogate end-of-life decision-making. Neuroethics 2008; 1: 75–83
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nachev P, Husain M. Comment on ‘Detecting awareness in the vegetative state’. Science 2007; 315: 1221
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monti MM, Coleman MR, Owen AM. Neuroimaging and the vegetative state. Disorders of Consciousness: Annals of the New York Academy of Science 2009; 1157: 81–89
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fins JJ. Neuroethics and neuroimaging: Moving toward transparency. American Journal of Bioethics 2008; 8: 46–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiff N. Multimodal neuroimaging approaches to disorders of consciousness. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2006; 21: 388–397
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glannon W. Bioethics and the brain. Oxford University Press, New York 2007; 136–138
   Google Scholar
• Schiff ND, Fins JJ. Hope for ‘comatose’ patients. Defining right and wrong in Brain Science, W Glannon. Dana Press, New York 2007; 344–359
   Google Scholar
• Yamamoto T, Katayama Y, Kobayashi K, Kasai M, Oshima H, Fukaya C. DBS therapy for a persistent vegetative state: Ten years follow-up results. Acta Neurochirurgica 2003; 87(Suppl)15–18
   Google Scholar
• Yamamoto T, Kobayashi K, Kasai M, Oshima H, Fukaya C, Katayama Y. DBS therapy for the vegetative and minimally conscious state. Acta Neurochirurgica 2005; 93((Suppl))101–104
   Google Scholar
• Schiff ND, Purpura KP. Towards a neurophysiological foundation for cognitive neuromodulation through deep brain stimulation. Thalamus & Related Systems 2002; 2: 55–69
   Google Scholar
• Schiff ND. Central thalamic deep-brain stimulation in the severely injured brain: Rationale and proposed mechanisms of action. Disorders of Consciousness: Annals of the New York Academy of Science 2009; 1157: 101–116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glannon W. Neurostimulation and the minimally conscious state. Bioethics 2008; 22: 337–345
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchanan AE, Brock DW. Deciding for others: The ethics of surrogate decision making. Cambridge University Press, New York 1989; 448
   Google Scholar
• National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Commissioned paper on research involving persons with mental disabilities: A review of policy issues and proposals. 1999. Available online at: www.bioethics.gov/reports/past_commission/nbac_mental2.pdf, accessed 12 February 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Tovino SA, Winslade WJ. A primer on the law and ethics of treatment, research, and public policy in the context of severe brain injury. Annals of Health Law 2005; 14: 1–54
   Google Scholar
• Appelbaum PS, Roth LH, Lidz C. The therapeutic misconception: Informed consent in psychiatric research. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 1982; 5: 319–329
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kringelbach ML, Aziz TZ. Deep brain stimulation avoiding the errors of psychosurgery. Journal of the American Medical Association 2009; 301: 1705–1707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bush SS. Geriatric mental health ethics: A case book. Springer Publishing Company, New York 2009
   Google Scholar
• Braun UK, Aanand N, McCullough LB. Reconceptualizing the experience of surrogate decision making: Reports vs genuine decisions. Annals of Family Medicine 2009; 7: 249–253
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fins JJ, Maltby BS, Friedmann E, Greene MG, Norris K, Adelman R, Byock I. Contracts, covenants and advanced care planning: An empirical study of the moral obligations of patients and proxy. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 2005; 29: 55–68
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger JT, DeRenzo EG, Schwartz J. Surrogate decision making: Reconciling ethical theory and clinical practice. Annals of Internal Medicine 2008; 149: 48–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torke AM, Alexander C, Lantos J, Siegler M. The physician-surrogate relationship. Archives of Internal Medicine 2007; 176: 1117–1121
   Google Scholar
• Dunn LB, Misra S. Research ethics issues in geriatric psychiatry. Psychiatric Clinics of North America 2009; 32: 395–411
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mezey M. Nurses and their changing relationships with family caregivers. The cultures of caregiving: Conflicts and common ground among families, health professionals and policy makers, C Carol Levine, TH Murray. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore 2004; 70–86
   Google Scholar
• Levine C, Zuckerman C. The trouble with families: Toward an ethic of accommodation. Always on call: When illness turns families into caregivers, C Levine. United Hospital Fund of New York, New York 2000; 147–157
   Google Scholar
• Martone M. Decisionmaking issues in the rehabilitation process. Hasting Center Report 2001; 36: 36–41
   Google Scholar
• Emanuel EJ, Currie XE, Herman A. Undue inducement in clinical research in developing countries: Is it a worry?. Lancet 2005; 366: 336–340
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wijdicks EFM. Minimally conscious stave vs persistent vegetative state: the case of Terry (Wallis) vs the case of Terri (Schiavo). Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2006;81:1155–1158. Available online at: http://mayoclinicproceedings.com/content/81/9/1155.full, accessed March 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson-Greene D. Informed consent issues in traumatic brain injury research: Current status of capacity assessment and recommendations for safeguards. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2010; 25: 145–150
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winslade WJ. Severe brain injury: Recognizing the limits of treatment and exploring the frontiers of research. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2007; 16: 161–168
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moser R, Thompson J, Eller M, De Fina P, Kuflik A. Challenges in consent and assent in severe disorders of consciousness patients. Paper presented at the 8th world congress on brain injury. Washington, D.C., U.S.A. 10–14 March 2010. Available online at: https://ibia.conferenceservices.net/reports/template/onetextabstract.xml?xsl=template/onetextabstract.xsl&conferenceID=1677&abstractID=355018, accessed March 2010.
   Google Scholar