Judging the quality of mercy: drawing a line between palliation and euthanasia.
Pediatrics. 2014 Feb;133 Suppl 1:S31-6.
Abstract
Clinicians
frequently worry that medications used to treat pain and suffering at
the end of life might also hasten death.
Intentionally hastening death, or euthanasia, is neither legal nor ethically appropriate in children.
In this article, we explore some of the historical and legal background regarding appropriate end-of-life care and outline what distinguishes it from euthanasia.
Good principles include clarity of goals and assessments, titration of medications to effect, and open communication.
When used appropriately, medications to treat symptoms should rarely hasten death significantly.
Medications and interventions that are not justifiable are also discussed, as are the implications of palliative sedation and withholding fluids or nutrition. It is imperative that clinicians know how to justify and use such medications to adequately treat suffering at the end of life within a relevant clinical and legal framework.
Intentionally hastening death, or euthanasia, is neither legal nor ethically appropriate in children.
In this article, we explore some of the historical and legal background regarding appropriate end-of-life care and outline what distinguishes it from euthanasia.
Good principles include clarity of goals and assessments, titration of medications to effect, and open communication.
When used appropriately, medications to treat symptoms should rarely hasten death significantly.
Medications and interventions that are not justifiable are also discussed, as are the implications of palliative sedation and withholding fluids or nutrition. It is imperative that clinicians know how to justify and use such medications to adequately treat suffering at the end of life within a relevant clinical and legal framework.
No comments:
Post a Comment