A disability perspective from the United States on the case of Ms B
Open accessAbstract
This article will examine the case of Ms B, a woman with tetraplegia for a year, who, prior to rehabilitation or return to community life, sought a ruling that doctors may turn off her ventilator. The authors are people with disabilities. Their analysis focuses on the manner in which the High Court (a) framed the case in terms of mental capacity, (b) addressed the issue of suicide and ambivalence, and (c) resolved informed consent and treatment alternative issues. While the disability community in the US does not oppose the general right to refuse treatment, there is significant concern about lack of informed consent and denial of desired treatment alternatives, and the cavalier manner in which these factors have been dismissed.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The public imagination generally assumes that people with high-level spinal cord injuries would suffer an extremely compromised quality of life, and may even be better off dead.
“in the public imagination it is generally assumed that people with highlevel spinal cord injuries would suffer an extremely compromised quality of life, and may even be better off dead (Coleman and Drake 2002; Sauder 2016).”
From Quadriplegia, virtue theory, and flourishing: a qualitative study drawing on self-narratives (2018) · cites this paper as Coleman and Drake 2002
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Gerhart KA, Koziol-McLain J, Lowenstein SR, et al. Quality of life following spinal cord injury: knowledge and attitudes of emergency care providers. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1994;23:807-12.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Quadriplegia, virtue theory, and flourishing: a qualitative study drawing on self-narratives
Clifton, S., Llewellyn, G., & Shakespeare, T. (2018) · Disability & Society · doi:10.1080/09687599.2017.1379951 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
- Authors
- Coleman, D., & Drake, S.
- Corresponding author
- Coleman, D
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Ethics
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2002-08
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 240-242
- ISSN
- 0306-6800 (ISSN-L)
- 1473-4257
- PMC
- PMC1733634
- OpenAlex
- W2128242599
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 1.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Ethics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
- Keywords
- tetraplegia, ventilator withdrawal, right to refuse treatment, informed consent, decision-making capacity, suicide, ambivalence, treatment options, disability perspectives, High Court ruling, end-of-life decisions
- MeSH terms
- Adult, England, Euthanasia, Passive, Female, Humans, Informed Consent, Quadriplegia, Respiration, Artificial, Right to Die, United States, Treatment Refusal, Mental Competency
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
