this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2023
125 points (100.0% liked)

Science

13028 readers
125 users here now

Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I'm guessing the patients were required beforehand to sign forms consenting to the device being taken out in the event of ___________ (in this case, the company going under). Because otherwise I don't understand how it'd be legal to force someone to have brain surgery against their will.

But if the company can't continue maintenance and support for the device, why not have her sign new forms exempting them from liability and just let her keep it? Is potential liability not the only limiting factor here? And would this be ethical?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

why not just let her keep it

It could also be for patenting reasons.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

You can always legally revoke consent for medical interventions, too.

Or, at least, that's my understanding as a layman.