The first controversial case, ironically, was to put a girl off life support when she was in fact not yet brain dead 1. Mary Quinlan was a 21 year old on life support.
She had been involved in an accident. She also was Roman Catholic as were her parents. The parents thought that keeping her alive on such a system was something they could not bear. They wanted her to die in dignity. Their Parish Priest defended their case. The doctors however would not agree as she was not brain dead. The case went to court, which made historical ground when it was decided that the criteria of a social institution in this case the Catholic religion could over-ride scientific thought.
She was subsequently removed from life support and allowed to die even though she was not brain dead. At this juncture it is important to note that the definition of the Church, subsequently put through scholarly rigour 2 takes note of two particular and important points. First, what is to be defined as ordinary or extraordinary has nothing to do with the state-of-the-art medicine used in such cases. Blood transfusion was then considered as quite an extraordinary form of treatment. Today it is very common place.
Yet we still note the controversy over Jehovah Witnesses, which to them is an extraordinary measure. What is ordinary for one person, such as having CPR, may be considered extraordinary for another.
In this regard, having an Advance Directive or living will can be very helpful. This brings up the second point — the relatives. The burden of the relatives is considered very important in determining whether treatment is ordinary or extraordinary. Therefore if the relatives have to go through extraordinary measures, such as selling a house, or extreme psychological distress, as in the Quinlan Case, then the treatment is considered extraordinary.
It is here that cases become controversial, although in reality they should remain confidential. Extraordinary means of preserving life are all medicine, treatments, and operations, which cannot be obtained or used without excessive expense, pain or other inconvenience for the patient or for others, or which, if used, would not offer a reasonable hope of benefit to the patient.
The Quinlan case showed how true to the word this is. When it comes to nutrition and hydration however there is still controversy among ethicists. Just as much ethicists however still believe that this is not the case. These arguments arise on whether to start a person in a PVS on hydration and nutrition. Definitely a person in such a state cannot be considered to experience hunger in the psychological state. Any nutrition and hydration does not give any satiety or satisfaction.
It is simply to keep the physiological status of the body. The Englaro case showed, as opposed to the Sciavo case, how much life can be being held on a thread with nutrition. Jonsen, Siegler and Winslade, following Catholic moral teaching, propose that since controversy exists, both positions are ethically permissible and there is legal ground for both 3.
Certainly, Jonsen is a renowned Catholic theologian in the U. What is unfortunate about these cases is that all forms of confidentiality are lost; people become overly emotional and judgemental about the relatives, and the application of the moral rule of what constitutes extraordinary is lost to public scrutiny and opinion. Some countries may decide to legislate to make things easier. There will hopefully come a time when we can have a structure which protects both patients and family, keeping the dignity of the situation.
This would have to include some form of scrutiny to avoid abuse. Death is seen as an integral element of life, since according to Christian beliefs death is not the end, but the transition to new life. In: AAS 49 , German in: A. Groner eds. Info Ordinary and extraordinary treatment Ordinary and extraordinary treatment Ordinary measures are those that are based on medication or treatment which is directly available and can be applied without incurring severe pain, costs or other inconveniences, but which give the patient in question justified hope for a commensurate improvement in his health.
Varianten ordinary and exceptional treatment methods. Artikelaktionen Drucken. Euthanasia I. Introduction and basic conceptual distinctions II.
0コメント