Special Ethical Issues in the Management of PVS Patients
Law, Medicine and Health Care. 1992 Spring-Summer; 20(1-2): 104-115.
Conclusions: It is clear that there are good reasons why the PVS patient has become the topic of much special bioethical discussion. Many important claims have been raised about such patients, and even if I have argued that most of these claims are questionable, I would agree that there is much to be learned from a careful examination of them. My own conclusions are that such patients are clearly non-dead non-persons. Life-prolonging therapy may certainly be withheld/withdrawn from them, although there are difficult questions surrounding nutrition and hydration and active euthanasia. If, however, they (in advance) or those who speak for them request further life-prolonging care, that care is in their interest and is neither inappropriate nor futile. It may nevertheless be withheld/withdrawn in at least some cases where economic considerations and considerations of provider integrity take precedence.
Active Euthanasia; Advance Directives; Allowing to Die; Artificial Feeding; Casuistry; Consensus; Consent; Death; Decision Making; Determination of Death; Euthanasia; Futility; Life; Moral Policy; Nutrition; Patient Care; Patients; Persistent Vegetative State; Personhood; Policy Analysis; Prolongation of Life; PVS; Resource Allocation; Standards; Third Party Consent; Withholding Treatment;
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.