Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide?

Jocelyn Downie; Ben White; Lindy Willmott; Eliana Close

Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide?

Jocelyn Downie, Ben White, Lindy Willmott, Eliana Close

Queensland University of Technology - Faculty of Law

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Abstract

This chapter begins by considering the context in which disputes about life-sustaining treatment arise and the tensions and traumas they involve. Demographic and cultural shifts around how we die, evolving responses to the concept of ‘medical futility’ and difficulties in predicting death and in determining patient views and wishes all provide a context in which these decisions are made and disputes resolved. We then outline different possible regulatory responses to resolving these disputes before proposing a framework for how they should be regulated, based on values that we believe should be engaged when making decisions about potentially life-sustaining treatment.

Original language	Canadian English
Title of host publication	Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide?
Publication status	Published - Jan. 1 2017

Keywords

Medical Futility
Withholding and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment
End of Life Decision-Making
Regulatory Responses
Regulatory Frameworks

Disciplines

Health Law and Policy
Law
Law and Society
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility
Legislation
Medical Jurisprudence

Access to Document

https://federationpress.com.au/product/tensions-and-traumas-in-health-law/#:~:text=Tensions%20and%20Traumas%20in%20Health%20Law%20is%20a%20remarkable%20collection,in%20the%20health%20care%20sector.

Cite this

Downie, J., White, B., Willmott, L., & Close, E. (2017). Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide? In Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide? https://federationpress.com.au/product/tensions-and-traumas-in-health-law/#:~:text=Tensions%20and%20Traumas%20in%20Health%20Law%20is%20a%20remarkable%20collection,in%20the%20health%20care%20sector.

@inbook{757585ea869e48699ac7861b2a10ff23,

title = "Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide?",

abstract = " This chapter begins by considering the context in which disputes about life-sustaining treatment arise and the tensions and traumas they involve. Demographic and cultural shifts around how we die, evolving responses to the concept of {\textquoteleft}medical futility{\textquoteright} and difficulties in predicting death and in determining patient views and wishes all provide a context in which these decisions are made and disputes resolved. We then outline different possible regulatory responses to resolving these disputes before proposing a framework for how they should be regulated, based on values that we believe should be engaged when making decisions about potentially life-sustaining treatment.",

keywords = "Medical Futility, Withholding and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment, End of Life Decision-Making, Regulatory Responses, Regulatory Frameworks",

author = "Jocelyn Downie and Ben White and Lindy Willmott and Eliana Close",

note = "{"}Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide?{"} in Ian Freckelton & Kerry Petersen, eds, Tensions and Traumas in Health Law (Alexandria, Australia: Federation Press, 2017).",

year = "2017",

month = jan,

day = "1",

language = "Canadian English",

booktitle = "Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide?",