美国的临终决策。

R D Truog
{"title":"美国的临终决策。","authors":"R D Truog","doi":"10.1017/S0265021507003419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Decision-making at the end-of-life in the United States has evolved over the last 50 yr, beginning with the development of the concept of brain death as a criterion for permitting patients who are in a state of 'irreversible coma' to be considered as 'dead' for purposes of ventilator withdrawal and organ transplantation. Since then, a firm consensus has emerged in American law and ethics that 'Patients have a virtually unlimited right to refuse any unwanted medical treatment, even if necessary for life itself.' With regard to patients who are unable to make decisions for themselves, both Europe and the United States are converging toward a view that respects a role for surrogates in decision-making while recognizing the need to limit their authority. Beyond decisions to withdraw and withhold treatments, both the United States and Europe are experimenting with active hastening of the dying process through euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. In the author's opinion, the next big question to be addressed in end-of-life decision-making is 'Just how bad does the neurological condition and prognosis need to be before it is acceptable to allow a decision to withdraw life support'? Although the practices described here have wide acceptance throughout the United States and Europe, the worldwide emergence of religious fundamentalism and the associated vitalistic view about the sanctity of life may result in significant changes over the next few decades.</p>","PeriodicalId":11873,"journal":{"name":"European journal of anaesthesiology. Supplement","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0265021507003419","citationCount":"29","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"End-of-life decision-making in the United States.\",\"authors\":\"R D Truog\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0265021507003419\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Decision-making at the end-of-life in the United States has evolved over the last 50 yr, beginning with the development of the concept of brain death as a criterion for permitting patients who are in a state of 'irreversible coma' to be considered as 'dead' for purposes of ventilator withdrawal and organ transplantation. Since then, a firm consensus has emerged in American law and ethics that 'Patients have a virtually unlimited right to refuse any unwanted medical treatment, even if necessary for life itself.' With regard to patients who are unable to make decisions for themselves, both Europe and the United States are converging toward a view that respects a role for surrogates in decision-making while recognizing the need to limit their authority. Beyond decisions to withdraw and withhold treatments, both the United States and Europe are experimenting with active hastening of the dying process through euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. In the author's opinion, the next big question to be addressed in end-of-life decision-making is 'Just how bad does the neurological condition and prognosis need to be before it is acceptable to allow a decision to withdraw life support'? Although the practices described here have wide acceptance throughout the United States and Europe, the worldwide emergence of religious fundamentalism and the associated vitalistic view about the sanctity of life may result in significant changes over the next few decades.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11873,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of anaesthesiology. Supplement\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0265021507003419\",\"citationCount\":\"29\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of anaesthesiology. Supplement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265021507003419\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of anaesthesiology. Supplement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265021507003419","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

摘要

在过去的50年里,美国的临终决策已经发生了演变,首先是脑死亡概念的发展,作为一种标准,允许处于“不可逆转昏迷”状态的患者被视为“死亡”,以便取下呼吸机和器官移植。从那以后,美国法律和道德规范中形成了一个坚定的共识,即“病人几乎有无限的权利拒绝任何不想要的治疗,即使是为了生命本身所必需的。”对于无法自己做决定的患者,欧洲和美国都倾向于一种观点,即尊重代理人在决策中的作用,同时承认有必要限制他们的权力。除了决定撤回和停止治疗之外,美国和欧洲都在尝试通过安乐死和医生协助自杀来积极加速死亡过程。在作者看来,在临终决策中需要解决的下一个大问题是“神经系统状况和预后到底有多糟糕,才可以接受撤销生命维持系统的决定”?尽管这里描述的实践在美国和欧洲得到了广泛的接受,但在世界范围内出现的宗教原教旨主义和与之相关的关于生命神圣性的生机论观点可能会在未来几十年导致重大变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
End-of-life decision-making in the United States.

Decision-making at the end-of-life in the United States has evolved over the last 50 yr, beginning with the development of the concept of brain death as a criterion for permitting patients who are in a state of 'irreversible coma' to be considered as 'dead' for purposes of ventilator withdrawal and organ transplantation. Since then, a firm consensus has emerged in American law and ethics that 'Patients have a virtually unlimited right to refuse any unwanted medical treatment, even if necessary for life itself.' With regard to patients who are unable to make decisions for themselves, both Europe and the United States are converging toward a view that respects a role for surrogates in decision-making while recognizing the need to limit their authority. Beyond decisions to withdraw and withhold treatments, both the United States and Europe are experimenting with active hastening of the dying process through euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. In the author's opinion, the next big question to be addressed in end-of-life decision-making is 'Just how bad does the neurological condition and prognosis need to be before it is acceptable to allow a decision to withdraw life support'? Although the practices described here have wide acceptance throughout the United States and Europe, the worldwide emergence of religious fundamentalism and the associated vitalistic view about the sanctity of life may result in significant changes over the next few decades.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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