Medical murder by omission? The law and ethics of withholding and withdrawing treatment and tube feeding.
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.
Keown
John
J
Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, Washington DC 20057, USA.
D016223:Advance Directives / Q000941:ethics; D016638:Critical Illness; D004750:Enteral Nutrition / Q000941:ethics*; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005066:Euthanasia, Passive / Q000941:ethics*; D006801:Humans; D016414:Resuscitation Orders / Q000941:ethics*; D012297:Right to Die / Q000941:ethics*; D006113:United Kingdom