A 19-year-old woman is diagnosed with metastatic Ewing sarcoma. She has undergone multiple treatments without improvement. She decides to stop treatment and pursue only palliative care. She is of sound mind and has weighed the benefits and risks of this decision. The patient’s mother objects and insists that treatments be continued. What should be done?

Halt treatments and begin palliative care.

Try to seek additional experimental treatments that are promising.

Follow the wishes of the patient’s mother as she has decision making power for the patient.

Continue treatments until the patient has a psychiatric evaluation.

Continue treatment because otherwise, the patient will die.

A 68-year-old woman was recently diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. At what point should her physician initiate a discussion with her regarding advance directive planning?

Now that she is ill, speaking about advance directives is no longer an option

Only if her curative surgical and medical treatment fails

Only if she initiates the conversation

A 72-year-old woman is brought to the emergency department by ambulance after an unexpected fall at home 1 hour ago. She was resuscitated at the scene by paramedics before being transferred to the hospital. She has a history of ischemic heart disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. She has not taken any sedative medications. Her GCS is 6. She is connected to a mechanical ventilator. Her medical records show that she signed a living will 5 years ago, which indicates her refusal to receive any type of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, intubation, or maintenance of life support on mechanical ventilation. Her son, who has a durable power-of-attorney for her healthcare decisions, objects to the discontinuation of mechanical ventilation and wishes that his mother be kept alive without suffering in the chance that she might recover. Which of the following is the most appropriate response to her son regarding his wishes for his mother?

“Based on her wishes, mechanical ventilation must be discontinued.”

“We will take every measure necessary to prolong her life.”

“She may be eligible for hospice care.”

“The opinion of her primary care physician must be obtained regarding further steps in management.”

“Further management decisions will be referred to the hospital’s ethics committee.”

A 76-year-old woman is brought to the physician by her daughter for evaluation of progressive cognitive decline and a 1-year history of incontinence. She was diagnosed with dementia, Alzheimer type, 5 years ago. The daughter has noticed that in the past 2 years, her mother has had increasing word-finding difficulties and forgetfulness. She was previously independent but now lives with her daughter and requires assistance with all activities of daily living. Over the past year, she has had decreased appetite, poor oral intake, and sometimes regurgitates her food. During this time, she has had a 12-kg (26-lb) weight loss. She was treated twice for aspiration pneumonia and now her diet mainly consists of pureed food. She has no advance directives and her daughter says that when her mother was independent the patient mentioned that she would not want any resuscitation or life-sustaining measures if the need arose. The daughter wants to continue taking care of her mother but is concerned about her ability to do so. The patient has hypertension and hyperlipidemia. Current medications include amlodipine and atorvastatin. Vital signs are within normal limits. She appears malnourished but is well-groomed. The patient is oriented to self and recognizes her daughter by name, but she is unaware of the place or year. Mini-Mental State Examination score is 17/30. Physical and neurologic examinations show no other abnormalities. A complete blood count and serum concentrations of creatinine, urea nitrogen, TSH, and vitamin B12 levels are within the reference range. Her serum albumin is 3 g/dL. Urinalysis shows no abnormalities. Which of the following is the most appropriate next step in management?

Evaluation for alternative methods of feeding

A 72-year-old man presents to the emergency department with chest pain and shortness of breath. An EKG demonstrates an ST elevation myocardial infarction, and he is managed appropriately. The patient suffers from multiple comorbidities and was recently hospitalized for a myocardial infarction. The patient has a documented living will, which specifies that he does wish to receive resuscitative measures and blood products but refuses intubation in any circumstance. The patient is stabilized and transferred to the medical floor. On day 2, the patient presents with ventricular fibrillation and a resuscitative effort occurs. He is successfully resuscitated, but his pulmonary parameters warrant intervention and are acutely worsening. The patient's wife, son, and daughter are present and state that the patient should be intubated. The patient's prognosis even with intubation is very poor. Which of the following describes the best course of action?

Do not intubate the patient given his living will

Intubate the patient - the family is representing the patient's most recent and accurate wishes

Consult the hospital ethics committee

Intubate the patient - a patient's next of kin take precedence over a living will

Do not intubate the patient as his prognosis is poor even with intubation

An 85-year-old man with terminal stage colon cancer formally designates his best friend as his medical durable power of attorney. After several courses of chemotherapy and surgical intervention, the patient’s condition does not improve, and he soon develops respiratory failure. He is then placed on a ventilator in a comatose condition. His friend with the medical power of attorney tells the care provider that the patient would not want to be on life support. The patient’s daughter disputes this and says that her father needs to keep receiving care, in case there should be any possibility of recovery. Additionally, there is a copy of the patient’s living will in the medical record which states that, if necessary, he should be placed on life support until full recovery. Which of the following is the most appropriate course of action?

The durable medical power of attorney’s decision should be followed.

Withdraw the life support since the patient’s chances of recovery are very low

Contact other family members to get their input for the patient

Act according to the patient’s living will

Follow the daughter’s decision for the patient

A 67-year-old man presents to the emergency department following an episode of chest pain and a loss of consciousness. The patient is in critical condition and his vital signs are rapidly deteriorating. It is known that the patient is currently undergoing chemotherapy for Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The patient is accompanied by his wife, who wants the medical staff to do everything to resuscitate the patient and bring him back. The patient also has 2 daughters, who are on their way to the hospital. The patient’s written advance directive states that the patient does not wish to be resuscitated or have any sort of life support. Which of the following is the appropriate course of action?

Respect the patient’s advance directive orders

Contact the patient’s siblings or other first-degree relatives

Take into account the best medical decision made by the physician for the patient

Respect the wife’s wishes and resuscitate the patient

Futility and medical judgment — USMLE Lesson

Medical Futility - The Judgment Call

Medical Futility: Interventions that are unlikely to produce any significant benefit for the patient.
- Quantitative Futility: The likelihood that an intervention will benefit the patient is exceedingly poor (e.g., <1% chance of success).
- Qualitative Futility: The quality of benefit an intervention will produce is extremely low or undesirable from the patient's perspective.

⭐ A patient's right to autonomy does not obligate a physician to provide treatments that violate principles of non-maleficence or are medically futile.

Principle	Application in End-of-Life Care
Beneficence	Duty to act in the patient's best interest; providing beneficial treatment.
Non-maleficence	Duty to "do no harm"; avoiding burdensome treatments with no benefit.
Autonomy	Patient's right to self-determination, including refusing or requesting care.
Justice	Fair allocation of healthcare resources; avoiding use on futile interventions.

Futility in Practice - The Action Plan

A structured, stepwise approach is crucial when managing disagreements over medical futility. The goal is conflict resolution that respects patient autonomy and professional integrity.

Core Legal Documents:
- Advance Directives: Outlines future healthcare wishes (e.g., living will).
- Healthcare Proxy: Appoints a surrogate decision-maker.
- Living Will: Details treatment preferences in specific terminal scenarios.
Futility Dispute Resolution Pathway:

⭐ Ethically and legally, there is no difference between withdrawing and withholding life-sustaining treatment.

High‑Yield Points - ⚡ Biggest Takeaways

Medical futility refers to an intervention that offers no reasonable hope of meaningful benefit to the patient.

Physicians are not ethically or legally obligated to provide care they judge to be futile, even if demanded.

In cases of conflict, the first step is clear communication; the next is consulting the hospital ethics committee.

Withholding or withdrawing futile care is distinct from euthanasia; it allows the natural course of disease.

The focus should shift to palliative care and comfort.

Unlock the full lesson and continue reading

Signup to continue reading this lesson and unlimited access questions, flashcards, AI notes, and more

Scan to download app

UNLOCK FREE ACCESS