Editorials

Withdrawing artificial feeding from children with brain damage

Over the past few decades the American legal system has repeatedly confronted the legal dilemmas of stopping treatment for patients in a persistent vegetative state. From 1975 to 1990, 33 cases reached the higher courts. At least half of these concerned the withdrawal of artificial feeding. The British legal system has also had to address the same questions--first in the case of Tony Bland, crushed at Hillsborough football stadium, and now more recently in the case of Thomas Creedon, a 22 month old child who is said to be severely brain damaged and unable to hear, speak, or see.¹ As legal systems are increasingly confronted with these cases, it is important to consider the basic medical, ethical, and legal principles that have unfolded over recent years.

The most critical factor from a medical perspective is when the persistent vegetative state (lasting . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Wit hdrawing artificial feeding from children with brain damage

P E Shannon
BMJ 1995 311: 1502. [Extract] [Full Text]

Withdrawing artificial feeding from children with brain damage

Alan J Grant
BMJ 1995 311: 1437. [Extract] [Full Text]

Tortuous arguments evade the issue

Keith Andrews
BMJ 1995 311: 1437. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Diekema, D. S., Botkin, J. R., Committee on Bioethics, (2009). Forgoing Medically Provided Nutrition and Hydration in Children. Pediatrics 124: 813-822 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Shannon, P E (1995). Wit hdrawing artificial feeding from children with brain damage. BMJ 311: 1502-1502 [Full text]  
• Grant, A. J (1995). Withdrawing artificial feeding from children with brain damage. BMJ 311: 1437-1437 [Full text]  
• Andrews, K. (1995). Tortuous arguments evade the issue. BMJ 311: 1437a-1437 [Full text]