The concise argument
Withholding artificial nutrition and hydration
Share this article
Click the icon of the social media platform on which you would like to share this article.
Email this article to a friend
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Other content recommended for you
- Why I wrote my advance decision to refuse life-prolonging treatment: and why the law on sanctity of life remains problematic
- Withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration from minimally conscious and vegetative patients: family perspectives
- Withdrawing clinically assisted nutrition and hydration (CANH) in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness: is there still a role for the courts?
- Causes and consequences of delays in treatment-withdrawal from PVS patients: a case study of Cumbria NHS Clinical Commissioning Group v Miss S and Ors  EWCOP 32
- Court applications for withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration from patients in a permanent vegetative state: family experiences
- Should we respect precedent autonomy in life-sustaining treatment decisions?
- A matter of life and death: controversy at the interface between clinical and legal decision-making in prolonged disorders of consciousness
- The minimally conscious state and treatment withdrawal: W v M
- Eluana Englaro, chronicle of a death foretold: ethical considerations on the recent right-to-die case in Italy
- Precedent autonomy should be respected in life-sustaining treatment decisions