Article info
PDFDisorders of consciousness
Can ‘Best Interests’ derail the trolley? Examining withdrawal of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration in patients in the permanent vegetative state
- Correspondence to Dr Zoe B Fritz, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick University, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK; Z.B.M.Fritz{at}warwick.ac.uk
Citation
Can ‘Best Interests’ derail the trolley? Examining withdrawal of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration in patients in the permanent vegetative state
Publication history
- Received July 30, 2015
- Revised May 20, 2016
- Accepted June 10, 2016
- First published August 31, 2016.
Online issue publication
June 29, 2017
Article Versions
- Previous version (31 August 2016).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
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.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Other content recommended for you
- A matter of life and death: controversy at the interface between clinical and legal decision-making in prolonged disorders of consciousness
- Withdrawing clinically assisted nutrition and hydration (CANH) in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness: is there still a role for the courts?
- Withdrawal of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration decisions in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness: best interests of the patients and advance directives are the keys
- Ethics briefing
- Procedure, practice and legal requirements: a commentary on ‘Why I wrote my advance decision’
- Persistent vegetative state and minimally conscious state: ethical, legal and practical dilemmas
- When ‘Sanctity of Life’ and ‘Self-Determination’ clash: Briggs versus Briggs [2016] EWCOP 53 – implications for policy and practice
- Withdrawing life-sustaining treatment: a stock-take of the legal and ethical position
- Commentary on Derick Wade's ‘Back to the bedside? Making clinical decisions in patients with prolonged unconsciousness’ and Zoe Fritz’ ‘Can ‘Best Interests’ derail the trolley?’ Examining withdrawal of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration in patients in the permanent vegetative state
- Why I wrote my advance decision to refuse life-prolonging treatment: and why the law on sanctity of life remains problematic