{"title":"在资源严重有限的情况下撤销延长生命的治疗:以色列法律的伦理和法律分析","authors":"Roy Gilbar, Nili Karako-Eyal","doi":"10.1177/0968533220968868","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The provision of lifesaving treatment subject to severely limited resources can lead to serious moral dilemmas and legal challenges on many levels. The issue becomes particularly acute in a crisis such as the current Covid-19 pandemic. In this context, legal questions arise regarding withdrawal of treatment, particularly withdrawal of ventilation. Israeli law prohibits withdrawal of ventilation, a situation that affects the prioritization criteria for patients who can benefit from ventilation. This issue is discussed in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic where the legal prohibition may lead to a situation in which patients will not have access to ventilators. In addition, a theoretical framework is proposed that includes not only beneficence, nonmaleficence, and distributive justice but also a relational approach to autonomy and justice. We also propose potential solutions under the current legal framework. Based on the legal analysis, it is proposed that Israeli law be amended so that more patients will have access to ventilation during a pandemic. It is argued that clinicians cannot act beneficently to prolong life if they ignore patients’ fundamental rights or the distributional effects of ethical policies. Autonomy and justice and their accompanying liberal and relational perspectives should remain relevant even during a pandemic, a time when resources are scarce.","PeriodicalId":39602,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law International","volume":"20 1","pages":"230 - 255"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0968533220968868","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment in the face of severely limited resources: Ethical and legal analysis of the law in Israel\",\"authors\":\"Roy Gilbar, Nili Karako-Eyal\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0968533220968868\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The provision of lifesaving treatment subject to severely limited resources can lead to serious moral dilemmas and legal challenges on many levels. The issue becomes particularly acute in a crisis such as the current Covid-19 pandemic. In this context, legal questions arise regarding withdrawal of treatment, particularly withdrawal of ventilation. Israeli law prohibits withdrawal of ventilation, a situation that affects the prioritization criteria for patients who can benefit from ventilation. This issue is discussed in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic where the legal prohibition may lead to a situation in which patients will not have access to ventilators. In addition, a theoretical framework is proposed that includes not only beneficence, nonmaleficence, and distributive justice but also a relational approach to autonomy and justice. We also propose potential solutions under the current legal framework. Based on the legal analysis, it is proposed that Israeli law be amended so that more patients will have access to ventilation during a pandemic. It is argued that clinicians cannot act beneficently to prolong life if they ignore patients’ fundamental rights or the distributional effects of ethical policies. Autonomy and justice and their accompanying liberal and relational perspectives should remain relevant even during a pandemic, a time when resources are scarce.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Law International\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"230 - 255\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0968533220968868\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Law International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0968533220968868\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0968533220968868","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment in the face of severely limited resources: Ethical and legal analysis of the law in Israel
The provision of lifesaving treatment subject to severely limited resources can lead to serious moral dilemmas and legal challenges on many levels. The issue becomes particularly acute in a crisis such as the current Covid-19 pandemic. In this context, legal questions arise regarding withdrawal of treatment, particularly withdrawal of ventilation. Israeli law prohibits withdrawal of ventilation, a situation that affects the prioritization criteria for patients who can benefit from ventilation. This issue is discussed in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic where the legal prohibition may lead to a situation in which patients will not have access to ventilators. In addition, a theoretical framework is proposed that includes not only beneficence, nonmaleficence, and distributive justice but also a relational approach to autonomy and justice. We also propose potential solutions under the current legal framework. Based on the legal analysis, it is proposed that Israeli law be amended so that more patients will have access to ventilation during a pandemic. It is argued that clinicians cannot act beneficently to prolong life if they ignore patients’ fundamental rights or the distributional effects of ethical policies. Autonomy and justice and their accompanying liberal and relational perspectives should remain relevant even during a pandemic, a time when resources are scarce.
期刊介绍:
The scope includes: Clinical Negligence. Health Matters Affecting Civil Liberties. Forensic Medicine. Determination of Death. Organ and Tissue Transplantation. End of Life Decisions. Legal and Ethical Issues in Medical Treatment. Confidentiality. Access to Medical Records. Medical Complaints Procedures. Professional Discipline. Employment Law and Legal Issues within NHS. Resource Allocation in Health Care. Mental Health Law. Misuse of Drugs. Legal and Ethical Issues concerning Human Reproduction. Therapeutic Products. Medical Research. Cloning. Gene Therapy. Genetic Testing and Screening. And Related Topics.