Withdrawing treatment from patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness: the presumption in favour of the maintenance of life is legally robust.
decision-making
end-of-life
law
prolongation of life and euthanasia
Journal
Journal of medical ethics
ISSN: 1473-4257
Titre abrégé: J Med Ethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7513619
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2021
02 2021
Historique:
received:
07
04
2020
revised:
21
04
2020
accepted:
25
04
2020
pubmed:
16
5
2020
medline:
18
9
2021
entrez:
16
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The question a judge has to ask in deciding whether or not life-sustaining treatment should be withdrawn is whether the continued treatment is lawful. It will be lawful if it is in the patient's best interests. Identifying this question gives no guidance about how to approach the assessment of best interests. It merely identifies the judge's job. The presumption in favour of the maintenance of life is part of the job that follows the identification of the question.The presumption is best regarded as a presumption of law. It has long been recognised as part of the way in which the English law discharges its obligations under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to life). But even if it is a 'mere' evidential presumption it cannot, on the facts of most cases involving applications for the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment from patients in prolonged disorders of consciousness, be rebutted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32409624
pii: medethics-2020-106280
doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106280
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
119-120Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.