Article Text
Statistics from Altmetric.com
According to Jewish law, to make a judgment that a life has no purpose and is not worth saving is contrary to the concept of justice
Traditional medical practice dictates that when patients are unable to eat or drink enough to sustain their basic nutritional requirements, artificial feeding and hydration is indicated. Common clinical examples of this problem are patients with senile dementia and those in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). In recent decades, however, the practice of mandating artificial feeding has been increasingly questioned. A combination of legal, ethical, and clinical considerations has resulted in broad support for withholding and withdrawing artificial nutrition. The guiding ethical principle in the current clinical standards is that patient autonomy must be honoured. In the context of an incompetent adult (such as a patient with advanced dementia or in a PVS), advance directives or surrogate decision making are legally binding. Such requests to withhold artificial nutrition are considered appropriate and even encouraged.1 Such a view, however, is not unanimous. For example, Catholic writers have questioned the current consensus. The New Jersey Catholic Conference has written that withholding nutrition and hydration from such patients “ultimately results in starvation, dehydration, and death,” and that withdrawing such basic care from patients who are not dying but in a PVS “is a clear statement that the patient’s life has no moral value”.2 This question is also of great concern in Jewish law (halachah). In contrast to secular medical ethics, halachah requires that artificial feeding be given to patients with dementia or in a PVS. The following discussion gives an overview of the pertinent arguments that have led to the consensus in secular ethics that artificial feeding may be withheld from the severely demented and the halachic considerations that argue against this practice.
CLINICAL ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF WITHHOLDING ARTIFICIAL FEEDING
The most obvious …
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- The provision of a percutaneously placed enteral tube feeding service
- Safety of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement in patients with continuous-flow ventricular assist devices
- Management of early PEG tube dislodgement: simultaneous endoscopic closure of gastric wall defect and PEG replacement
- Observed high incidence of buried bumper syndrome associated with Freka PEG tubes
- Severe recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement: a rare complication
- Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding
- How long do percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding tubes last? A retrospective analysis
- Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): a practical approach for long term management
- Artificial nutrition and hydration in the patient with advanced dementia: is withholding treatment compatible with traditional Judaism?
- Enteral feeding in neurological disorders