Helga Wanglie case illustrates a respirator is non-beneficial because it would not restore consciousness. This concept is best described as what?

• A. Beneficence
• B. Non-maleficence
• C. Medical Futility
• D. Autonomy

Answer: (C)

Medical futility describes a situation where a treatment is unlikely to produce any meaningful benefit for the patient, such as restoring consciousness or achieving a meaningful recovery. In the Helga Wanglie case, using a respirator would not restore consciousness, so continuing ventilation wouldn’t meet the goals of care. This concept goes beyond general beneficence or non-maleficence by focusing on whether the intervention can achieve worthwhile outcomes; a treatment might be well-intentioned (beneficent) or not directly causing harm (non-maleficent) yet still be considered futile if it cannot achieve the patient’s goals. Autonomy is relevant because surrogates or patients (when able) make decisions, but the label that best fits this clinical judgment is medical futility.