Citation

Martin C. Pediatrics 2014; 134(Suppl 2): S87-96.

Affiliation

Department of Philosophy, University of Missouri at Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri martincw@umkc.edu.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2014, American Academy of Pediatrics)

DOI

10.1542/peds.2014-1394D

PMID

25274880

Abstract

For centuries, many physicians and parents assumed that it was ethically justifiable to lie to a dying child. The reasoning was clear. Because the lie would likely eliminate or prevent a concrete harm (the child's fear), and the lie is about a harm that is unavoidable anyway, a lie appeared to be the morally desirable thing to do. Today, the ethical consensus has shifted. Many doctors and other health professionals now argue that we have an obligation to tell children the cold, hard truth. In this article, I argue that "the cold, hard truth" (assuming we can know it with certainty) might not always be in the best interest of the patient. To illustrate the point, I analyze an episode in Dostoevsky's novel, The Brothers Karamazov, in which a child is dying, his father lies to him about it, and 2 doctors take very different approaches to the truth. Each of these individuals has a particular interest when it comes to the question of "the truth" about the death of Ilyusha. I use this story to ask whether it is ethically permissible to lie to a dying child and, if so, who has the moral authority to tell that lie.

Language: en