Is It Lawful To Withhold Treatment?
Memorandum of Law
To: Kevin Zeiler
From: Kathryn Cagle
RE: Is it legal to withdrawal treatment
Date: April 8, 2014
Question Presented
1) Is it lawful to withhold treatment of a patient?
2) Are food and water considered medical treatment?
Short Answer
1) Yes, when death is inevitable and not preventable by medical treatment, it is justly lawful to withhold treatment that would only slightly prolong life while causing the patient and/or the family undue hardship (Pozgar, G.D., 2012).
2) Yes, according to the AMA, food and water are considered medical treatment.
Statement of Facts In 1985, the New Jersey Supreme Court overturned an appellate division decision in the case of re Claire C. Conroy (486 A.2d 1209 N.J. Sup. Ct. 1985). The case …show more content…
Decisions for withdrawal of treatment should be made based on what is best for the patient taking pain and suffering into account (AMA, 1986). Surrogate decisions are most often accepted by the physician. Situations that may require institutional or judicial review or intervention are: 1) no available family member to act as surrogate; 2) dispute among family members and no designated decision maker identified in advance directive; 3) health care provider thinks that decision is not what patient would have wanted if competent; 4) physician does not believe the decision is in patient’s best interest (AMA, 1986). Ethics committees will usually entertain issues before courts are brought into the mix. In instances where a patient was never competent to begin with, doctors must rely solely on the surrogate decision maker and assume they are acting from a place of true concern for the patient (AMA, 1986). The AMA states, “Physicians have an obligation to relieve pain and suffering and to promote the dignity and autonomy of dying patients in their care” (AMA, …show more content…
In Black’s Law Dictionary death is defined as “cessation of respiration, heartbeat, and certain indications of central nervous system activity, such as respiration and pulsation” (Pozgar, G.D., 2012). Modern medicine has found a way to prolong life with the assistance of machines to produce heartbeats and respirations. Most courts agree that when brain function is gone the patient is dead (Pozgar, G.D., 2012). Pro-life activists do not always agree with the “right to die” philosophy when it comes to the elderly and the disabled (Pozgar, G.D., 2012). Those activists believe that it is a slippery slope in which family members, who want to gain inheritance money or are tired of caring for the sick individual, will prematurely decide to terminate the patient’s life (Pozgar, G.D., 2012). I can understand that this might be the aim for some family members but that is why the physicians, ethics committees and ombudsman are involved in these matters to ensure that the best interest of the patient is seen
To: Kevin Zeiler
From: Kathryn Cagle
RE: Is it legal to withdrawal treatment
Date: April 8, 2014
Question Presented
1) Is it lawful to withhold treatment of a patient?
2) Are food and water considered medical treatment?
Short Answer
1) Yes, when death is inevitable and not preventable by medical treatment, it is justly lawful to withhold treatment that would only slightly prolong life while causing the patient and/or the family undue hardship (Pozgar, G.D., 2012).
2) Yes, according to the AMA, food and water are considered medical treatment.
Statement of Facts In 1985, the New Jersey Supreme Court overturned an appellate division decision in the case of re Claire C. Conroy (486 A.2d 1209 N.J. Sup. Ct. 1985). The case …show more content…
Decisions for withdrawal of treatment should be made based on what is best for the patient taking pain and suffering into account (AMA, 1986). Surrogate decisions are most often accepted by the physician. Situations that may require institutional or judicial review or intervention are: 1) no available family member to act as surrogate; 2) dispute among family members and no designated decision maker identified in advance directive; 3) health care provider thinks that decision is not what patient would have wanted if competent; 4) physician does not believe the decision is in patient’s best interest (AMA, 1986). Ethics committees will usually entertain issues before courts are brought into the mix. In instances where a patient was never competent to begin with, doctors must rely solely on the surrogate decision maker and assume they are acting from a place of true concern for the patient (AMA, 1986). The AMA states, “Physicians have an obligation to relieve pain and suffering and to promote the dignity and autonomy of dying patients in their care” (AMA, …show more content…
In Black’s Law Dictionary death is defined as “cessation of respiration, heartbeat, and certain indications of central nervous system activity, such as respiration and pulsation” (Pozgar, G.D., 2012). Modern medicine has found a way to prolong life with the assistance of machines to produce heartbeats and respirations. Most courts agree that when brain function is gone the patient is dead (Pozgar, G.D., 2012). Pro-life activists do not always agree with the “right to die” philosophy when it comes to the elderly and the disabled (Pozgar, G.D., 2012). Those activists believe that it is a slippery slope in which family members, who want to gain inheritance money or are tired of caring for the sick individual, will prematurely decide to terminate the patient’s life (Pozgar, G.D., 2012). I can understand that this might be the aim for some family members but that is why the physicians, ethics committees and ombudsman are involved in these matters to ensure that the best interest of the patient is seen