First Do No Harm: Communication Surrounding Non-Beneficial Treatments

Despite a consensus in the medical community that clinicians should not offer non-beneficial treatments (NBTs) to their patients, little guidance exists on the particular communication needs around this fraught topic. While intended in the spirit of non-maleficence, setting limits around NBTs can be seen by patients and families as abandonment, resulting in conflict.In this paper, we propose a framework to guide Palliative Care clinicians in communicating about these complex issues with patients and families. We offer 2 cases illustrating requests for treatments deemed non-beneficial, along with language to aid clinicians in navigating similar instances in their own clinical practice. Our framework emphasizes proactive relationship building with patients and families, close attention to their values, and compassionate limit-setting when medically appropriate. We propose approaching these discussions with a "breaking bad news" framework rather than one of shared decision-making. By carefully attending to their communication in these matters, clinicians can build trust with patients and families and avoid burdening them with false choices. This will ultimately minimize conflict, allay fears of abandonment and result in higher quality care for seriously ill patients.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
Published
2026-05-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091261451410
Primary Topic
Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

First Do No Harm: Communication Surrounding Non-Beneficial Treatments

Kayla Sheehan, Laura Taylor, Adam Marks, Cassie Stanzler
American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
article

First Do No Harm: Communication Surrounding Non-Beneficial Treatments

Kayla Sheehan, Laura Taylor, Adam Marks, Cassie Stanzler
article en

Abstract

Despite a consensus in the medical community that clinicians should not offer non-beneficial treatments (NBTs) to their patients, little guidance exists on the particular communication needs around this fraught topic. While intended in the spirit of non-maleficence, setting limits around NBTs can be seen by patients and families as abandonment, resulting in conflict.In this paper, we propose a framework to guide Palliative Care clinicians in communicating about these complex issues with patients and families. We offer 2 cases illustrating requests for treatments deemed non-beneficial, along with language to aid clinicians in navigating similar instances in their own clinical practice. Our framework emphasizes proactive relationship building with patients and families, close attention to their values, and compassionate limit-setting when medically appropriate. We propose approaching these discussions with a "breaking bad news" framework rather than one of shared decision-making. By carefully attending to their communication in these matters, clinicians can build trust with patients and families and avoid burdening them with false choices. This will ultimately minimize conflict, allay fears of abandonment and result in higher quality care for seriously ill patients.

American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
University of Michigan (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.