AAP Guidelines Address Parental Requests for Nonbeneficial Treatments

Formulating treatment plan can prevent intractable conflict; second opinion can help doctors, parents to find common ground
Adobe Stock
Adobe Stock
Published on

MONDAY, March 23, 2026 (HealthDay News) -- Ways to navigate and resolve disputes related to parental requests for potentially nonbeneficial treatment are addressed in a clinical report and accompanying technical report issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics and published online March 23 in Pediatrics.

Deena Levine, M.D., from St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, and colleagues provide practice guidance for pediatricians and other physicians for resolving disputes when parents (or surrogate decision-makers for children) request interventions that are not medically recommended and are considered to be potentially nonbeneficial, focusing on life-threatening situations.

According to the authors, it is ethically appropriate to forgo physiologically futile interventions and illegal interventions, irrespective of patient or parent requests. Physicians have a moral obligation not to offer such interventions. Formulating a goal-concordant treatment plan by first identifying patient or parent goals can prevent intractable conflict and is an essential step toward patient- and family-centered care. Gathering additional information and engaging relevant parties may be helpful if parents continue to request treatment that the medical team believes to be nonbeneficial. A clear process of resolution should be established, starting with obtaining a second opinion to help clarify misunderstandings and help parents and physicians to find common ground. Transfer to another institution should be considered.

"If a systematic and transparent approach does not result in resolution of the disagreement or transfer to an alternate location for care, there is uncertainty or even low-level potential for benefit of a persistently requested therapy, and there is no significant risk of harm to the patient, it is reasonable to consider the emotional burden to the family of unilaterally withholding or withdrawing medical interventions and consider continuing to provide ongoing life-sustaining medical treatment," the authors write.

One author disclosed ties to Chiesi USA.

Related Stories

No stories found.
Clinical Briefing Report
clinicalbriefingreport.com