Medical murder by omission? The law and ethics of withholding and withdrawing treatment and tube feeding

被引:7
作者
Keown, J [1 ]
机构
[1] Georgetown Univ, Kennedy Inst Eth, Washington, DC 20057 USA
关键词
Bland case; British Medical Association guidance; ethics; euthanasia; medicine and law; tube feeding; with holding/withd rawi ng treatment;
D O I
10.7861/clinmedicine.3-5-460
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
When is it lawful and ethical to withhold or withdraw treatment and tube feeding? In recent years, the courts have handed down important decisions and medical bodies have issued professional guidelines on withholding and withdrawing treatment and tube feeding. A major criticism of these decisions and guidelines has been that while they prohibit the intentional hastening of a patient's life by an act ('active euthanasia'), they permit the intentional hastening of a patient's death by omission ('passive euthanasia'); and they prohibit actively assisting suicide, but permit passively assisting suicide. By focusing on the landmark decision of the Law Lords in the Tony Bland case, and on the guidelines on withholding and withdrawing treatment and tube feeding issued by the British Medical Association, this paper considers whether this criticism is sound, and concludes that it is.
引用
收藏
页码:460 / 463
页数:4
相关论文
共 4 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2003, VEG STAT GUID DIAGN
[2]  
*BR MED ASS, 2001, WITHH WITHDR LIF PRO
[3]  
*GEN MED COUN, 2002, WITHH WITHDR LIF PRO
[4]  
KEOWN J, 2002, EUTHANASIA ETHICS 6