Advertisement

Life as a Good and Our Obligations to Persistently Vegetative Patients

  • Kevin Wm. Wildes
Part of the Philosophy and Medicine book series (PHME, volume 41)

Abstract

With the development of medical technology it is possible to maintain the life of a patient in a persistent vegetative state for an indefinite period of time. A persistent vegetative state (PVS) is a one of permanent unconsciousness with a loss of all cerebral cortical functions, which leads to complete unawareness of self or of the environment, though there is the persistence of sleep-wake cycles (Executive Board, American Academy of Neurology, 1989, pp. 125-126). There are 15,000–25,000 PVS patients in the United States (AMA Council on Scientific Affairs and Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, p. 427). As the recent discussions about the case of Nancy Cruzan illustrate, such cases raise difficult moral and legal questions for the families of such patients as well as for medical and legal communities and society at large (Cruzan). The ethical, political, and judicial arguments over these cases have raised discussion about the extent of our obligation to treat such patients.

Keywords

Persistent Vegetative State Common Morality Artificial Feeding Human Good Biological Life 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. AMA, Council on Scientific Affairs and Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs: 1990, ‘Persistent vegetative state and the decision to withdraw or withhold life support’, The Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 263, no. 3, January 19,’,426–430.Google Scholar
  2. Archdiocese of New York: 1990, ‘Principles in regard to withholding or withdrawing artificially assisted nutrition/hydration’, Issues in Law and Medicine, Vol 6, no. 1, 89–93.Google Scholar
  3. Ashley, B.: 1991, ‘Dominion or stewardship: Theological reflections’, this volume, pp.171–187.Google Scholar
  4. Bole, T.: 1991, Why almost any cost to others to preserve the life of the irreversibly comatose constitutes an extraordinary means, this volume, pp.Google Scholar
  5. Boyle, L.: 1989, ’sanctity of Life and Suicide: Tensions and developments within common morality’ in B.A. Brody (ed.), Suicide and Euthanasia, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 221–250.Google Scholar
  6. Dewey, J.: 1960, The Questfor Certainty, Putnamn, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Engelhardt, H. T. 1973, Mind-Body: A Categorial Relations, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.Google Scholar
  8. Executive Board, American Academy of Neurology.: 1989, ‘Position statement on the management and care of persistent vegetative state patient’, Neurology, 39, 125–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Finnis, J., J. Boyle, G. Grisez: 1987, Nuclear Deterrence, Morality and Realism, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  10. Grisez, G.: 1989, ’should nutrition and hydration be provided to the permanently unconscious and other mentally disabled persons?’ Issues in Law and Medicine, 5, 165–179.Google Scholar
  11. Kelly, G.: 1950, ‘The duty of using artificial means of preserving life’, Theological Studies, II, 203–220.Google Scholar
  12. May, W. et al.: 1987, ‘Feeding and hydrating the permanently unconscious and other vulnerable persons‘, Issues in Law and Medicine, 3, 204–217.Google Scholar
  13. May, W.: 1990, ‘Criteria for withholding or withdrawing treatment’, Linacre Quarterly, Vol. 57, No.3, 81–90.Google Scholar
  14. McCormick, R.: 1985, ‘Caring or starving? The case of Claire Conroy‘Caring or starving? The case of Claire Conroy', America, April America 6, 269–273.Google Scholar
  15. McHugh, J. T.: 1989, ‘Artificially assisted nutrition and hydration’, Origins, 19, 213–216.Google Scholar
  16. Nancy Beth Cruzan v. Director Missouri Department of Health:’, 58 Law Week, June 25,1990, 4916–4941.Google Scholar
  17. Nagel, T.: 1988, ‘Autonomy and deontology’, Consequentialism and Its Critics, S. Scheffler (ed), Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 142–172.Google Scholar
  18. O’Rourke, K.: 1989, ’should nutrition and hydration be provided to permanently unconscious and other mentally disabled persons?‘, Issues in Law and Medicine, 5, 181–196.Google Scholar
  19. Paris, J.: 1991, ‘The catholic tradition on the use of nutrition and fluids’, this volume pp. 189–208.Google Scholar
  20. Storey, P.: 1991, ‘Artificial feeding and hydration in advanced illness’, this volume pp.67–75.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kevin Wm. Wildes

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations