Withdrawing Treatment for the “Wrong” Reasons

2007 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 509-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven J. Baumrucker
2010 ◽  
pp. 141-147
Author(s):  
Jane Lynch ◽  
Louise M Terry ◽  
Sue Battersby ◽  
Colum J Smith

BMJ ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 317 (7152) ◽  
pp. 165-165
Author(s):  
L. Beecham

1974 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley Degner

A Guttman scale was developed to elicit physicians' tendencies in regard to life-prolonging decisions. The great majority (79.4%) of the 92 physicians in the sample favored withdrawing treatment from terminally ill patients in at least two out of three imaginary situations. A comparison of the sample's life-prolonging decisions by their beliefs in God and afterlife yielded no significant differences. Comparison of the sample's life-prolonging decisions by their beliefs about death indicated that physicians who favored withdrawal of treatment from terminally ill patients viewed death more as a negative than as a neutral or positive phenomenon.


Author(s):  
Robert M. Veatch ◽  
Amy Haddad ◽  
E. J. Last

Avoidance of killing is a moral consideration that arises in health care controversies involving the notions that human life is sacred or that killing is morally wrong. Pharmacists may find themselves in positions where they must reconcile the idea that generally killing is a harm to be avoided based on the principle of nonmaleficence with the idea that death might be perceived by a particular patient as a beneficial outcome. This chapter explores the principle of avoidance of killing, highlights differences between active, merciful killing and decisions to forgo treatment, and discusses the concept of proportionality. The cases presented involve topics such as withholding treatment and withdrawing treatment and direct versus indirect killing.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document