|Prep for USMLE|
|         Forum      |     Resources||New Posts   |   Register   |   Login||»  |
I think all of you are familiar with the case that a child and mother are transported to hospital due to car accident and they are incapacitated due to
cloudy consciousness and need blood transfusion. At this time father suddenly arrives and says do not transfuse due to religious reasons.
I am also sure that all of you agree that at least the child should receive
transfusion and we do not listen to father based on the rule:
"Parents cannot withhold life- or limb-saving treatment from their children under 18".
But how about the miserable mother?
According to UW step 2: Transfuse
"In an emergent situation, a physician is authorized to provide life-saving treatment to the unconsciouss patient"
But according to UW step 1: Do not transfuse
"The husband's wishes for his wife must be respected, but the child should be treated emergently with blood products".
Dudes, which one is correct, explanation of step1 or step 2 UW?
| Similar forum topics|
blood cholesterol, high blood sugur
would you tell the mother ?
| Related resources|
Advertise | Support | Privacy | TOS | Premium | Contact