Next up: A proposal for values-based law reform on unilateral withholding and withdrawal of potentially life-sustaining treatment

Downie, Jocelyn, Willmott, Lindy, & White, Benjamin P. (2017) Next up: A proposal for values-based law reform on unilateral withholding and withdrawal of potentially life-sustaining treatment. Alberta Law Review, 54(3). (In Press)

View at publisher

Abstract

As the legalization of assisted dying shifts from a project for law reform to one of implementation, the gaze for Canadian end of life law and policy academics and practitioners should be turned quickly to another pressing issue – the unilateral withholding and withdrawal of potentially life-sustaining treatment. What should happen when the health care team believes that treatment should not be provided and the patient’s loved ones believe that it should? While the future of end of life law and policy no doubt includes many other issues, this is an urgent and immediate horizon issue for Canada as well as a number of other countries (e.g., the United States, Australia, and New Zealand) and a more distant horizon (but inevitable) issue for many other countries as they move beyond the debate of whether to even withholding or withdrawal of potentially life-sustaining treatment (e.g., South Korea).

In this paper, we attempt to take a step back from the drama and vitriol surrounding conflict that can arise when the health care team believes that treatment should not be provided and the patient’s loved ones believe that it should. We suggest and model an approach to law and policy reform in this area. To that end, we begin with a review of what is known about what is going on in relation to unilateral withholding and withdrawal of treatment (without the consent or knowledge of the patient or patients substitute decision-maker) demonstrating that: it is happening; it is controversial; it is being challenged in courts; and it is not being approached by the law in the same way in every country (or indeed, even in the same way within a country). We then present a process for pursuing law reform, exploring Canada as a case study, to provide a model strategy for approaching law reform in other countries and to advance the project of law reform in Canada. To that end, we reflect on the fundamental values that should underpin a legal framework for decision-making on whether potentially life-sustaining treatment should be withheld or withdrawn. These values and the ways to balance these values against each other are drawn from the constitution, legislation, the common law, conventions and treaties that have been ratified by Canada,and “fundamental values of Canadian society” within which the ethical debate about the unilateral withholding and withdrawal of potentially life-sustaining treatment is situated. We then develop a proposal for how the law could be reformed such that it will more closely align with the fundamental values it is supposed to serve. We hope that in the end, this proposal might help us to move forward from friction to accord and, ultimately, to a future of better care for both the living and the dying.

Impact and interest:

Citation counts are sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science® citation databases.

These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.

Citations counts from the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.

Full-text downloads:

88 since deposited on 16 Sep 2016
88 in the past twelve months

Full-text downloads displays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.

ID Code: 98887
Item Type: Journal Article
Refereed: Yes
Keywords: End of life decision-making, Withholding and withdrawing life sustaining treatment, Futility, Futile treatment, Adult guardianship law, Health law, Medical law
ISSN: 0002-4821
Subjects: Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > Law and Society (180119)
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES (220000) > APPLIED ETHICS (220100) > Medical Ethics (220106)
Divisions: Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Law
Current > Research Centres > Australian Centre for Health Law Research
Copyright Owner: Copyright 2017 Alberta Law Review Society
Deposited On: 16 Sep 2016 00:37
Last Modified: 20 Sep 2016 00:32

Export: EndNote | Dublin Core | BibTeX

Repository Staff Only: item control page