Article info
PDFBrief report
Why the BMA guidance on CANH is dangerous
- Correspondence to Dr Rosemarie Anthony-Pillai, Palliative Care Consultant Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, Harefield Hospital, Harefield UB9 6JH, Uk; roseap{at}doctors.org.uk
Citation
Why the BMA guidance on CANH is dangerous
Publication history
- Received June 25, 2019
- Accepted July 4, 2019
- First published July 29, 2019.
Online issue publication
October 15, 2019
Article Versions
- Previous version (15 October 2019).
- 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
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
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?
- Withdrawing life-sustaining treatment: a stock-take of the legal and ethical position
- Ethics briefing
- Persistent vegetative state and minimally conscious state: ethical, legal and practical dilemmas
- Ethics of providing clinically assisted nutrition and hydration: current issues
- Can ‘Best Interests’ derail the trolley? Examining withdrawal of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration in patients in the permanent vegetative state
- 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
- Making decisions to limit treatment in life-limiting and life-threatening conditions in children: a framework for practice
- Can there be wrongful life at the end of life? German courts revisit an old problem in a new context