Withdrawal of artificial nutrition in the persistent vegetative state: a continuous controversy.
The withdrawal of life support from patients in persistent vegetative state (PVS) is a controversial issue, as highlighted by a continuous public debate and recent judicial decisions. In Germany, a topic of particular interest is the abatement of artificial nutrition. First, doubts have come up whether every kind of technically delivered nutrition should be rated identically or whether a distinction between feeding tubes/gastrotomies and intravenous administration should be made. Second, the question is left open whether artificial nutrition is part of basic care and as a consequence may never be discontinued, or if it has to be regarded as life-sustaining treatment which can be refused by surrogates on behalf of the nonautonomous patient. Most recently, controversial judicial decisions have dealt with the question if substituted judgement concerning abatement of artificial nutrition by surrogates or legal guardians is permitted or if the approval of a court is necessary. Forensic evidence is provided which indicates that the withdrawal of artificial nutrition in patients in the persistent vegetative state may become a contributing causative factor or even the immediate cause of death. The legal implications with regard to the above-mentioned issues of controversy are discussed.
Schmidt
P
P
Institute of Forensic Medicine, University of Bonn, Stiftsplatz 12, 53111, Bonn, Germany.
Dettmeyer
R
R
Madea
B
B
D004750:Enteral Nutrition; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005066:Euthanasia, Passive / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005554:Forensic Medicine / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000379:methods; D005858:Germany; D006801:Humans; D007441:Intubation, Gastrointestinal; D010344:Patient Advocacy / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D018458:Persistent Vegetative State / Q000628:therapy*; D013727:Terminal Care / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000379:methods