Show simple item record

dc.creatorMishkin, Douglas B.en
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T18:34:02Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T18:34:02Zen
dc.date.created1991en
dc.date.issued1991en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Clinical Ethics. 1991 Winter; 2(4): 282-285.en
dc.identifier.issn1046-7890en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=The+next&title=Journal+of+Clinical+Ethics.++&volume=2&issue=4&pages=282-285&date=1991&au=Mishkin,+Douglas+B.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/736904en
dc.description.abstractIn the aftermath of the Wanglie case, there is a widespread perception that Hennepin County Medical Center petitioned the county district court to terminate Helga Wanglie's treatment against her husband's wishes and that the judge denied that petition. In fact, the medical center made no such request, and the judge issued no such ruling....The case was tried and decided on the issue of who should speak for Mrs. Wanglie. Neither raised nor resolved was the larger question: may a hospital terminate life-sustaining treatment of a long-term PVS patient on futility grounds, despite the contrary instructions of an appropriate surrogate acting in good faith....Avoiding the real issue also deprives the parties, the court, and ultimately the public of the benefits of the rigorous clash of views between advocates for the conflicting positions. For the law to grow with changing notions of ethical medical practice, parties must engage in the challenging exercise of tracing their arguments to legal precedent, professional and scholarly analyses, and social values....en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:KIE/36036en
dc.subjectAllowing to Dieen
dc.subjectCommunicationen
dc.subjectConsensusen
dc.subjectConsenten
dc.subjectDecision Makingen
dc.subjectEthicsen
dc.subjectFutilityen
dc.subjectGuardiansen
dc.subjectHospitalsen
dc.subjectInstitutional Policiesen
dc.subjectJudicial Actionen
dc.subjectLawen
dc.subjectLegal Aspectsen
dc.subjectLegal Guardiansen
dc.subjectLifeen
dc.subjectMedical Ethicsen
dc.subjectNursing Homesen
dc.subjectPersistent Vegetative Stateen
dc.subjectPhysiciansen
dc.subjectPublic Participationen
dc.subjectPVSen
dc.subjectSocial Valuesen
dc.subjectThird Party Consenten
dc.subjectValuesen
dc.subjectWithholding Treatmenten
dc.titleThe Next Wanglie Case: The Problems of Litigating Medical Ethicsen
dc.provenanceDigital citation created by the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature at Georgetown University for the BIOETHICSLINE database, part of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics' Bioethics Information Retrieval Project funded by the United States National Library of Medicine.en
dc.provenanceDigital citation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named NBIO hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection BioethicsLine hosted by Georgetown University.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2022 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885