Role of Ethics Consultation in Pediatric Congenital Heart Disease

  • Angira PatelEmail author
  • Rupali Gandhi
  • Constantine Mavroudis


Clinical ethics consultation is an emerging field whereby an individual or group of individuals with expertise in ethics provides a set of services to clinicians and families to provide guidance about ethical issues that arise during medical treatment. Ethicists may help to resolve disputes when parties disagree about treatment decisions, offer historical context regarding issues that medical providers and families may think are novel, and provide insights into the current state of the issue in the bioethics literature. Multiple methodologies and approaches exist by which an ethics consultant can scrutinize, analyze, and provide recommendations of an ethically acceptable option. In this chapter, we will focus on the role of the ethics consultant, explore various approaches to performing a formal ethics consultation, review cases from the literature, and describe two clinical ethical consultations that involve pediatric patients with congenital heart disease. Finally, we provide an update on the credentialing of ethics consultants and the potential utility of a national ethics database in the future.


Ethics consultation Pediatric cardiology Pediatric cardiac surgery Medical ethics Mediation 


  1. 1.
    Courtwright A, Jurchak M. The evolution of American hospital ethics committees: a systematic review. J Clin Ethics. 2016;27(4):322–40.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Siegler M. Clinical medical ethics: its history and contributions to American medicine. J Clin Ethics. 2019;30(1):17–26.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fox E, Myers S, Pearlman RA. Ethics consultation in United States hospitals: a national survey. Am J Bioeth. 2007;7(2):13–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carter B, et al. Why are there so few ethics consults in children’s hospitals? HEC Forum. 2018;30(2):91–102.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lo B. Resolving ethical dilemmas: a guide for clinicians. 5th ed. Philadelphiia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkens; 2013.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fox E, Chanko BL, Powell T. Integrated ethics: improving ethics quality in healthcare. In: National center for ethics in healthcare veterans health administration.
  7. 7.
    American Society of Bioethics and Humanities. Core competencies for healthcare ethics consultation. 2nd ed. Glenview: ASBH.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    La Puma J, Schiedermayer DL. Ethics consultation: a practical guide. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morreim H. Conflict resolution in the clinical setting: a story beyond bioethics mediation. J Law Med Ethics. 2015;43(4):843–56.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dubler NN, Liebman CB. Bioethics mediation: a guide to shaping shared solutions, revised and expanded edition. New York: United Hosptial Fund of New York; 2004.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jonsen AR, Siegler M, Winslade WJ. Clinical ethics: a practical approach to ethical decisions in clinical medicine. 7th ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2010.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Berkowitz KA, Chanko BL, Foglia MB, Fox E, Powell T. Ethics Consultation: responding to ethics questions in healthcare, 2nd ed. 2015.
  13. 13.
    Jurachak M. Ethics consultation: an overview and approac of “doing ethics”. [cited 2019 June 25].
  14. 14.
    Glover JJ, Ozar DT, Thomasma DC. Teaching ethics on rounds: the ethicist as teacher, consultant, and decision-maker. Theor Med. 1986;7(1):13–32.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kon AA. They’re not just little adults: special considerations in pediatric clinical ethics consultation. Am J Bioeth. 2015;15(5):30–2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kon AA, et al. Parental refusal of surgery in an infant with tricuspid atresia. Pediatrics. 2016;138(5):e20161730.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kon AA, Prsa M, Rohlicek CV. Choices doctors would make if their infant had hypoplastic left heart syndrome: comparison of survey data from 1999 and 2007. Pediatr Cardiol. 2013;34(2):348–53.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Patel A, et al. Should physicians offer a ventricular assist device to a pediatric oncology patient with a poor prognosis? AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(5):E380–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Graf M, et al. Use of genetic risks in pediatric organ transplantation listing decisions: a national survey. Pediatr Transplant. 2019;23(4):e13402.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kirsch RE, et al. The burdens of offering: ethical and practical considerations. World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg. 2017;8(6):715–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Char DS, et al. Genomic contraindications for heart transplantation. Pediatrics. 2017;139(4):e20163471.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kaufman BD, et al. Compassionate deactivation of ventricular assist devices in children: a survey of pediatric ventricular assist device clinicians’ perspectives and practices. Pediatr Transplant. 2019;23(3):e13359.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mavroudis CD. Foetal cardiac intervention: an ethical perspective. Cardiol Young. 2011;21(Suppl 2):141–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Edwards LA, et al. Controversy about a high-risk and innovative fetal cardiac intervention. Pediatrics. 2018;142(3):e20173595.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gerardin J, et al. Lost in the system? Transfer to adult congenital heart disease care-challenges and solutions. Congenit Heart Dis. 2019;14:541–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jersak T, Gustin J, Humphrey L. Challenges of the transition: a case of noncompliance in an adult with congenital heart disease. J Palliat Med. 2019;
  27. 27.
    Uzark K, et al. Transition readiness in adolescents and young adults with heart disease: can we improve quality of life? J Pediatr. 2019;212:73–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Steinberger J, et al. Cardiovascular health promotion in children: challenges and opportunities for 2020 and beyond: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;134(12):e236–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Connolly SD, Ward KM. The role of exercise prescription in pediatric preventive cardiology programs. Pediatr Ann. 2018;47(12):e494–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Perak AM, Benuck I. Preserving optimal cardiovascular health in children. Pediatr Ann. 2018;47(12):e479–86.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Drezner JA, et al. AMSSM position statement on cardiovascular preparticipation screening in athletes: current evidence, knowledge gaps, recommendations, and future directions. Clin J Sport Med. 2016;26(5):347–61.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Asif IM, Drezner JA. Cardiovascular screening in young athletes: evidence for the electrocardiogram. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2016;15(2):76–80.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Patel A, Lantos JD. Can we prevent sudden cardiac death in young athletes: the debate about preparticipation sports screening. Acta Paediatr. 2011;100(10):1297–301.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pierpont ME, et al. Genetic basis for congenital heart defects: current knowledge: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Congenital Cardiac Defects Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young: endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics. Circulation. 2007;115(23):3015–38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ito S, et al. Appropriate use of genetic testing in congenital heart disease patients. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2017;19(3):24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Patel A, et al. Variations in criteria and practices for heart transplantation listing among pediatric transplant cardiologists. Pediatr Cardiol. 2019;40(1):101–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wightman A, Diekema D. Should an undocumented immigrant receive a heart transplant? AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(10):909–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mabel H, et al. When a child needs a transplant but lacks familial social support. Pediatrics. 2019;143(1):e20181551.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kirkpatrick JN, Kaufman B. Why should we care about ethical and policy challenges in congenital heart disease? World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg. 2013;4(1):7–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pasquali SK, Dimick JB, Ohye RG. Time for a more unified approach to pediatric health care policy?: the case of congenital heart care. JAMA. 2015;314(16):1689–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dibardino DJ, et al. Current expectations for newborns undergoing the arterial switch operation. Ann Surg. 2004;239(5):588–96; discussion 596–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kiener A, et al. Long-term survival after arterial versus atrial switch in d-transposition of the great arteries. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;106(6):1827–33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Michalak KW, et al. Reoperations and catheter interventions in patients with transposition of the great arteries after the arterial switch operation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;51(1):34–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bellinger DC, et al. Adolescents with d-transposition of the great arteries corrected with the arterial switch procedure: neuropsychological assessment and structural brain imaging. Circulation. 2011;124(12):1361–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Eligibility for healthcare ethics consulting certification. [cited 2019 June 24].
  46. 46.
    Vincent RN, et al. Procedural characteristics and adverse events in diagnostic and interventional catheterisations in paediatric and adult CHD: initial report from the IMPACT Registry. Cardiol Young. 2016;26(1):70–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Jacobs JP, et al. Linking the congenital heart surgery databases of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the congenital heart Surgeons’ Society: part 1--rationale and methodology. World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg. 2014;5(2):256–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Johnson LM, et al. Ethics consultation in pediatrics: long-term experience from a pediatric oncology center. Am J Bioeth. 2015;15(5):3–17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Antommaria AH. Characterizing clinical ethics consultations: the need for a standardized typology of cases. Am J Bioeth. 2015;15(5):18–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hauschildt K, et al. The use of an online comment system in clinical ethics consultation. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017;8(3):153–60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angira Patel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rupali Gandhi
    • 2
  • Constantine Mavroudis
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric CardiologyAnn & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, Northwestern University Feinberg School of MedicineChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Advocate Children’s Heart Institute, Advocate Children’s HospitalOak LawnUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Division of Cardiovascular SurgeryJohns Hopkins All Children’s HospitalSt. PetersburgUSA

Personalised recommendations