rss
J Med Ethics 2007;33:538-540 doi:10.1136/jme.2006.017657
  • Law, ethics and medicine

The ethical and legal implications of deactivating an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in a patient with terminal cancer

  1. Ruth England1,
  2. Tim England2,
  3. John Coggon3
  1. 1John Eastwood Hospice, Sutton-in-Ashfield, Nottinghamshire, UK
  2. 2Health Care of the Elderly, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK
  3. 3Postgraduate Research Office, Cardiff Law School, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
  1. Correspondence to:
 MrJ Coggon
 Postgraduate Research Office, Cardiff Law School, Cardiff University, Museum Avenue, Cardiff CF10 3XJ, UK; coggonj{at}cf.ac.uk
  • Received 1 June 2006
  • Accepted 1 September 2006
  • Revised 20 July 2006

Abstract

In this paper, the ethical and legal issues raised by the deactivation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with terminal cancer is considered. It is argued that the ICD cannot be well described either as a treatment or as a non-treatment option, and thus raises complex questions regarding how rules governing deactivation should be framed. A new category called “integral devices” is proposed. Integral devices require their own special rules, reflecting their position as a “halfway house” between a form of treatment and a part of the body. The practical problems faced by doctors working in palliative medicine with regard to the deactivation of ICDs are also considered.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.