Human patient put in suspended animation for the first time

Consent is required for literally every medical procedure/decision. The anesthesiologists/nurse anesthetists usually obtain consent from the patient (or family in the event that the patient doesn't have the capacity to make decisions for themselves) the day before a scheduled surgery in the hospital I work at.

Anesthesiologists are going to have to familiarize themselves with this approach (which probably means a ton of hours of training/education and possible certifications), medical directors/educators in hospitals are going to have to start working on drafts for policies and procedures regarding the practice, and the researchers are going to have to work out a ton of kinks before you see this as a common practice in the OR.
I was moreso under the belief that this would be most beneficial for in the moment emergency situations such as someone with a fatal gunshot wound. In the event the procedure didn't work or if there was some crazy complication, would the doctor be liable for performing this "suspended animation" procedure?
 
I was moreso under the belief that this would be most beneficial for in the moment emergency situations such as someone with a fatal gunshot wound. In the event the procedure didn't work or if there was some crazy complication, would the doctor be liable for performing this "suspended animation" procedure?
Liable? Sure. Would they face any consequences if things go wrong? Almost certainly not. In order to effectively sue a doctor you basically have to prove that they deviated from accepted practice, which ultimately harmed the patient.

I was off-base with my consent comments though. In the event where life-saving treatment is needed immediately consent is generally waived if the time to obtain it is insufficient.
 
Back
Top Bottom