European journal of health law
-
Non-voluntary passive euthanasia, the commonest form of euthanasia, is seldom mentioned in the UK. This article illustrates how the legal reasoning in Airedale NHS Trust v Bland contributed towards this conceptual deletion. ⋯ But since the lawfulness of (withdrawing futile treatment and euthanasia) hinges on the futility of treatment, and since the guidance provides advice about withdrawing treatment from patients who differ from those considered in court, the lawfulness of such 'treatment decisions' is unclear. Legislation is proposed in order to redress the ambiguity that arose when moral decisions about 'euthanasia' were translated into medical decisions about 'treatment'.
-
The recent case of David Bradley, who shot and killed four members of his family after telling his doctor he 'wanted to kill someone', has raised the question of whether a healthcare professional could ever be held liable for failing to take steps to constrain a potentially dangerous patient. Until recently, it was considered that the United Kingdom courts would be reluctant to impose a duty to protect third parties. ⋯ When this duty will arise, and how it can be discharged, remain challenging questions. Furthermore, healthcare professionals face the unenviable task of balancing competing duties, in which the rights--and safety--of their patients must also be borne in mind.
-
In December 2005 the first national guideline for palliative sedation in the Netherlands was published. This guideline was developed by a committee of the Royal Dutch Medical Association, at the request of the Dutch government. The guideline defines palliative sedation as 'the intentional lowering of consciousness of a patient in the last phase of his or her life'. ⋯ Palliative sedation is given in the last phase of life, in the imminently dying patient. Palliative sedation raises several legal questions. In this article we describe the structure and contents of the guideline, with special attention for the main legal issues involved, like the distinction between palliative sedation and euthanasia and the process of informed consent.
-
This article considers whether two significant philosophical objections to autonomy-based legal approaches to decision-making for incompetent individuals could be accommodated by the law. These philosophical objections are known as the personal identity and welfare problems. ⋯ Next, the present legal position is briefly canvassed in a comparative vein. Finally, the article suggests how the personal identity and welfare problems might be accommodated were legislators minded to do so, by proposing specific statutory amendments to the recent English legislation on advance decisions and evaluating their viability, particularly in light of the European Convention on Human Rights.