The topic of not initiating resuscitation from the perspective of Czech law not only in the context of palliative care.

Q4 Medicine
Casopis lekaru ceskych Pub Date : 2024-01-01
David Bláha, Pavel Böhm
{"title":"The topic of not initiating resuscitation from the perspective of Czech law not only in the context of palliative care.","authors":"David Bláha, Pavel Böhm","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the age of advanced modern medicine, prolonging the lives of patients is becoming easier and easier. Science is even going so far that some authors are beginning to see the need to advocate for the patient's right to die. The authors of the recommended resuscitation procedures themselves state that prolonging the inevitable dying process should be considered a harm (dysthanasia). The issue of not initiating urgent resuscitation is part of not only clinical practice, but also the study of physicians and other health professionals. The various criteria, indications, and contraindications for this action are repeatedly discussed in the course of study and practice, but rarely does this discussion go into significant detail. The teaching is limited to their enumeration or description of some of the more clearly understood ones, which are, for example, certain signs of death and their presence. The terminal stage of an incurable chronic disease is only marginally mentioned as a contraindication to urgent resuscitation, perhaps due to its ethical and legal overlap. The article includes an analysis of the sources of regulation of this issue, focusing mainly on legal and professional sources and their relationship. It also describes the actual process of decision making about the initiation of palliative care, decision making about end-of-life care, including the issue of not initiating urgent resuscitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":9645,"journal":{"name":"Casopis lekaru ceskych","volume":"163 4","pages":"137-142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Casopis lekaru ceskych","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the age of advanced modern medicine, prolonging the lives of patients is becoming easier and easier. Science is even going so far that some authors are beginning to see the need to advocate for the patient's right to die. The authors of the recommended resuscitation procedures themselves state that prolonging the inevitable dying process should be considered a harm (dysthanasia). The issue of not initiating urgent resuscitation is part of not only clinical practice, but also the study of physicians and other health professionals. The various criteria, indications, and contraindications for this action are repeatedly discussed in the course of study and practice, but rarely does this discussion go into significant detail. The teaching is limited to their enumeration or description of some of the more clearly understood ones, which are, for example, certain signs of death and their presence. The terminal stage of an incurable chronic disease is only marginally mentioned as a contraindication to urgent resuscitation, perhaps due to its ethical and legal overlap. The article includes an analysis of the sources of regulation of this issue, focusing mainly on legal and professional sources and their relationship. It also describes the actual process of decision making about the initiation of palliative care, decision making about end-of-life care, including the issue of not initiating urgent resuscitation.

从捷克法律的角度来看,不启动复苏的话题不仅适用于姑息治疗。
在现代医学发达的时代,延长病人的生命变得越来越容易。科学甚至发展到一些作者开始认为有必要倡导病人的死亡权利。推荐复苏程序的作者自己也表示,延长不可避免的死亡过程应被视为一种伤害(dysthanasia)。不启动紧急复苏的问题不仅是临床实践的一部分,也是医生和其他医疗专业人员研究的一部分。在学习和实践过程中,人们反复讨论这一行动的各种标准、适应症和禁忌症,但很少有详细的讨论。教学内容仅限于列举或描述一些比较明确的内容,例如,死亡的某些征兆及其存在。不治慢性病的晚期作为紧急复苏的禁忌症只是略有提及,这可能是由于其在伦理和法律上的重叠性。文章分析了这一问题的监管来源,主要侧重于法律和专业来源及其关系。文章还描述了关于启动姑息治疗的实际决策过程、关于临终关怀的决策过程,包括不启动紧急复苏的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Casopis lekaru ceskych
Casopis lekaru ceskych Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信