Withdrawing and withholding artificial nutrition and hydration from patients in a minimally conscious state: re: M and its repercussions.
نویسنده
چکیده
In 2011 the English Court of Protection ruled that it would be unlawful to withdraw artificial nutrition and hydration from a woman, M, who had been in a minimally conscious state for 8 years. It was reported as the first English legal case concerning withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration from a patient in a minimally conscious state who was otherwise stable. In the absence of a valid and applicable advance decision refusing treatment, of other life-limiting pathology or excessively burdensome suffering, the judgement makes it clear that the obligation on health professionals falls strongly in favour of preserving life. Although the Court sought to limit the judgement as closely as possible to the facts of the case, it is likely to have a significant impact on life-sustaining treatment decisions for people in states of low awareness. This paper outlines the main legal features of the judgement.
منابع مشابه
Withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration from minimally conscious and vegetative patients: family perspectives
In W v M, family members made an application to the Court of Protection for withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration from a minimally conscious patient. Subsequent scholarly discussion has centred around the ethical adequacy of the judge's decision not to authorise withdrawal. This article brings a different perspective by drawing on interviews with 51 individuals with a relative who is...
متن کاملMoving on from bland: the evolution of the law and minimally conscious patients.
The decision in Bland centred on the withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration from a patient in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). Since then, a new medical condition has emerged, known as a minimally conscious state (MCS). In W v M, the Court of Protection was asked to authorise the withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration from a patient in a MCS. Baker J refused to grant the...
متن کاملWithholding and withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration.
Although the practice of withholding and withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) has become more common, it remains controversial, particularly in the paediatric setting. Decisions regarding ANH, along with other medical interventions, should be considered in the individual context of the child's overall plan of care. The purpose of the present practice point is to provide guidance...
متن کاملFactors related to adult patient decision making about withholding or withdrawing nutrition and/or hydration.
End-of-life decisions that focus on withholding or withdrawing nutrition and/or hydration present difficult choices at particularly vulnerable times for patients and families. Clinical ethics studies published in the last twenty years provide insight about the decision making process that can be useful to all parties involved. The purpose of the systematic research review is to synthesize empir...
متن کاملSanctity of life law has gone too far.
Last year an English judge ruled, with the explicit approval of the president of the Court of Protection, that under the rules of that court all patients in a minimally conscious state must be referred to the Court of Protection if life prolonging treatment by artificial nutrition and hydration is to be withheld or withdrawn. Moreover, the judge emphasised that in deciding whether such withdraw...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Journal of medical ethics
دوره 39 9 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2013