Article info
PDFCommentary
Is ‘best interests’ the right standard in cases like that of Charlie Gard?
- Correspondence to Dr Robert D Truog, Center for Bioethics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA; robert_truog{at}hms.harvard.edu
Citation
Is ‘best interests’ the right standard in cases like that of Charlie Gard?
Publication history
- Received October 7, 2019
- Accepted October 17, 2019
- First published October 29, 2019.
Online issue publication
January 14, 2020
Article Versions
- Previous version (14 January 2020).
- 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)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Decision making and modes of death in a tertiary neonatal unit
- Neonatal deaths: prospective exploration of the causes and process of end-of-life decisions
- Worth living or worth dying? The views of the general public about allowing disabled children to die
- Minority report: can minor parents refuse treatment for their child?
- Ethical climate in contemporary paediatric intensive care
- Meta-surrogate decision making and artificial intelligence
- Settling for second best: when should doctors agree to parental demands for suboptimal medical treatment?
- Parental manual ventilation in resource-limited settings: an ethical controversy
- Short-term outcome of treatment limitation discussions for newborn infants, a multicentre prospective observational cohort study
- How should neonatal clinicians act in the presence of moral distress?