h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Can we make a deal that the reference to heaven doesn't provoke a huge religious debate?

No, probably not.

If the parents have a belief in the Angels in Heaven, then they will presumably also have a strong belief in the sanctity of life, which would prevent them from taking this course of action.

And I think it is a bit much to expect any parent to take their child to the doctor to ask to have it put down. In any case, that's not euthanasia. The whole point about euthanasia (I thought - but maybe I'm wrong) is that it is the *patient* choosing death. Not somebody else choosing it on the patient's behalf.

So I suppose I would say that I can go with medical treatment being carried out (or withdrawn) without the patient's consent, in some circumstances; but I can't support the ending of life without the patient's consent, regardless of the circumstances. And I can't see a court of law (in the UK) concluding otherwise, either.

Mol

The word 'euthanasia' covers any painless death, not just one that was requested by the 'patient' themselves. Apparently withdrawing life support is considered to be euthanasia, and often that's the relative's decision.

I have to say that it's hard enough to make the decision to have a pet euthanasied, even if you've only had it a few months, let alone make that decision for a child.

Apparently withdrawing life support is considered to be euthanasia,

>No that's not providing futile treatment - which is different

Apparently withdrawing life support is considered to be euthanasia,

>Technically no member of medical staff can be complied to provide futlie treatment - and actually it's a medical decsion to act in the best interests of the patient.

Usually relatives know what the best interests are so we take their advice, but there are circumstances when they don't - for instance in cases involving large life insurance policies..

My understanding is that the term 'euthanasia' does not cover withdrawing treatment.

However, my personal view is that it's very difficult to argue that there is a defensible moral distinction in prinicple between passively letting die and actively killing.

My instinct is to disagree, Otto, but I'd rather be basing an argument on reason than instinct so I'll hang fire for a bit

Mol

Any digressions about religion can be made at The Sideline: A16529664.

TRiG.

>> My understanding is that the term 'euthanasia' does not cover withdrawing treatment. <<

My understanding is that Z, as a medical doctor, was giving the medical profession's ethical understanding of euthanasia. And frankly that's the one that matters.

RF

I don't think my post was clear. - Withdrawing treatment isn't euphanasia, not treating is not euphanasia, euphanisa is actively killing.

I feel I should describe the difference between withdrawing treatment and euphanasia a bit more.

A doctor has a duty not to provide futile treatment - as if if this treatment would not do you any good then we should not provide it.

'doing any good' is sometimes obvious.. eg if you are going to die of overwhealming infection in about 24 hours time then treating your veccurcas is really not going to do you any good.

But if you are going to die from, say, cancer in 2 weeks time and you delevop any infection that would lead to death in a couple of days unless it was treated then it's debatable whether extending life by those two weeks would 'do any good'.

Firstly if you were so ill that you were going to die of cancer in two weeks, then there's a high chance that even with active treatment you would still die of the infection.

To treat the infection would cause some discomfort - maintainly 7 days of IV access in a person who has had chemotherapy is going to involve repeated failed attempts at finding a vein.

Also dying from an infection is probably going to be less painful than dying from cancer.

IN this case it's a pretty complex descion but most people would probably go for 'not treating infection' but it's the patients decsion.

But if the patient is unconscious in English law it's the Doctors decsion to decide what's in the patients best interests - not the famlies.

Obviously most of the time the best way to find out is to ask the family, but IMHO it's always important to make clear that you're asking their opinion on your decsion NOT asking them to make it!

I don't feel guilty for making a DNAR, but I know families feel guilty for making it even when it was clearly the right thing to do.