• Gil Siegal, Shimon Glick, Irit Offer-Stark, and Avraham Steinberg.
• Ono Academic College, Israel.
• Harefuah. 2018 Jan 1; 157 (1): 38-41.

IntroductionForce feeding of fasting hunger-striking prisoners is the subject of considerable controversy in Israel and elsewhere, posing a direct conflict between two basic ethical values: that of human life and respect for autonomy. The Israel Medical Association, as well as the World Medical Association, has taken the position that force feeding of such prisoners is an act of torture and is therefore unethical. However this paper presents an opposing view, which recently became the law in Israel, that, whereas the rights of prisoners to decree a hunger strike as a form of protest should be respected, if the prolongation of the strike reaches a stage of clear and present danger to the life and health of a prisoner, the saving of the prisoner's life must take precedence over considerations of autonomy. The paper present the steps that should be taken, including extensive and empathic efforts to persuade the prisoner to end his/her fast; gaining the approval of a hospital's ethics committee; and gaining the approval of a district court judge; the feeding is to be carried out in the most humane and sensitive manner as befitting a lifesaving procedure for any patient. This position is consistent with Israel's Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, Israel's Patient Rights Law, Israel's "Do not stand idly by your fellow man's blood" Law, with several Israeli court decisions and in keeping with the dominant Israeli culture. Finally, instructions for physicians who object to such measures are discussed, ascertaining the freedom of conscience as well as preserving the life of the hunger-strikers.

17 keywords...

hide…