Article Text
Abstract
There is a strong presumption in favour of the maintenance of life. Given sufficient evidence, it can be rebutted. But the epistemic uncertainties about the best interests of patients in prolonged disorders of consciousness ('PDOC') and the wishes that they should be presumed to have are such that, in most PDOC cases, the presumption cannot be rebutted. It is conventional and wrong (or at least unsupported by the evidence) to assume that PDOC patients have no interest in continued existence. Treatment withdrawal/continuation decisions should focus on the patient as he or she actually is, and should not unjustifiably assume that the premorbid patient continues to exist unchanged, and that the actual patient has the same interests as the premorbid patient and would make the same decisions in relation to treatment as the premorbid patient would have done.
- allocation of healthcare resources
- autonomy
- bills, laws and cases
- capacity
- decision-making
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors I am the sole author of this article.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- It is never lawful or ethical to withdraw life-sustaining treatment from patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness
- Withdrawing life-sustaining treatment: a stock-take of the legal and ethical position
- When ‘Sanctity of Life’ and ‘Self-Determination’ clash: Briggs versus Briggs [2016] EWCOP 53 – implications for policy and practice
- Withdrawing treatment from patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness: the presumption in favour of the maintenance of life is legally robust
- Withdrawing treatment from patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness: the wrong answer is what the wrong question begets
- A matter of life and death
- The right to die in the minimally conscious state
- Withdrawing clinically assisted nutrition and hydration (CANH) in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness: is there still a role for the courts?
- A matter of life and death: controversy at the interface between clinical and legal decision-making in prolonged disorders of consciousness
- Why I wrote my advance decision to refuse life-prolonging treatment: and why the law on sanctity of life remains problematic