...
首页> 外文期刊>Medicine and law >Decision-making at the end-of-life and the incompetent patient: a comparative approach.
【24h】

Decision-making at the end-of-life and the incompetent patient: a comparative approach.

机译:临终和无能力患者的决策:一种比较方法。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

In contrast to the situation in the Netherlands and Belgium, the legislatures in both England & Wales and Germany have not recognised that active euthanasia may be lawful in any circumstance. Nevertheless, the courts in both jurisdictions have held that passive euthanasia, that is the withdrawal or withholding of life-prolonging treatment, is perfectly lawful; indeed it will often constitute good medical practice. This article adopts a comparative approach to assessing the manner in which decisions to withdraw or withhold life-prolonging treatment are made in relation to previously competent patients without a legally effective advance directive or a proxy decision-maker, considering the approaches adopted by the courts in England & Wales and Germany: the best interests and 'presumed will' approaches respectively. Due to the inherent drawbacks associated with each approach it is concluded that the best way forward would be for both jurisdictions to adopt a mixed approach, allowing the autonomy model totemper the best interests approach, recognising that the patient is an individual rather than simply an object of concern.
机译:与荷兰和比利时的情况相反,英格兰,威尔士和德国的立法机关都没有意识到,主动安乐死在任何情况下都可能是合法的。然而,两个司法管辖区的法院都裁定,被动安乐死,即撤消或保留延长生命的治疗,是完全合法的;确实,这通常会构成良好的医疗习惯。本文采用比较方法来评估在没有法律有效的预先指示或代理决策者的情况下,对先前有能力的患者做出撤回或保留延长寿命的治疗的决定的方式,并考虑法院采用的方法。英格兰和威尔士以及德国:最大利益和“推定意愿”分别接近。由于每种方法都存在固有的弊端,因此得出结论,最好的方法是两个司法管辖区都采用混合方法,从而使自治模型可以尝试最大利益方法,同时要认识到患者是个人而不是简单的对象值得关注。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号