PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Euthanasia, Passive”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources
PubMed1993

Euthanasia.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Puzzling cases about killing and letting die.

Discussions of euthanasia often appeal to the distinction between killing people and letting them die. Favor asks whether this distinction is morally important--in particular, whether killing is worse than merely letting someone die, even when the motivations and consequences are the same. She explores our moral intuitions via a discussion of various subtly different hypothetical examples.

Ethical Analysis↗
PubMed1985

The living will.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Connecticut↗
PubMed1996

Euthanasia: the intensive care unit.

The purpose of intensive care is to provide monitoring and organ support for patients with critical illness from which recovery is possible. Despite increasing technological and pharmacological sophistication, mortality in intensive care units remains high, with significant disability in those who survive. Methods of predicting outcome from intensive care have been developed. These enable patients to be placed in risk groups, but do not accurately predict the outcome of individual patients. That prediction is a clinical judgement based on the underlying disease, the number of body systems failing and the length of time for which intensive care support has been necessary. Once a decision has been made to withhold or withdraw intensive care, the principles of good palliative medicine should be employed during what will then be the inevitable terminal phase of the illness.

APACHE↗
PubMed1996

Euthanasia: the institutional response.

For health institutions, euthanasia represents an increasingly complex but increasingly inescapable debate, in which the expectations of health professionals have moved away from the declaratory answer in search of greater sophistication and clarity. The House of Lords' Committee on Medical Ethics drew attention to the unavoidable complexity of future medical decisions at the end of life, the inexorably changing doctor-patient relationship and the demographic shift resulting in greater numbers surviving longer to face chronic, degenerative conditions. The committee proved a watershed in many respects, not least in the moral debate it triggered in the public and among health professionals. Arguably it aired questions which still have not been conclusively answered. Its questioning mirrored the trend observable among the institutions' membership for rigour and detail to justify the positions adopted. It represents one facet of the pressure on health institutions, whose previous mode of dealing with the euthanasia debate was by declaration and some would say by pontification. Their reticence to probe deeper was undoubtedly based partly on the conviction that detailed debate about euthanasia was an anathema within professional groups committed to the traditional life-preserving goal of medicine. Also influential has been the assumption that it would be otiose for professional bodies to issue guidance on matters unambiguously covered by law. Arguably, both of these views should have been challenged if not dispelled by the effort involved in contributing evidence to the House of Lords' Committee. That exercise exposed the need for guidance and the ambiguities at law but it remains to be seen how the debate will be taken forward, or not, by health institutions.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗