Cusack D A, Sheikh A A, Hyslop-Westrup J L
Division of Legal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University College Dublin, Ireland.
Med Sci Law. 2000 Apr;40(2):133-42. doi: 10.1177/002580240004000209.
This paper addresses the current medico-legal issues surrounding PVS (Permanent Vegetative State), including: the lack of a unified definition of the acronym PVS, the varying criteria for diagnosis of PVS, and the issue of patients who maintain a minimal degree of consciousness and cannot be categorized as PVS patients. First, we analyse the differing medical definitions and criteria for diagnosis in vegetative conditions. We also ask what part 'consciousness' plays in treatment decisions made by the family, the healthcare team, and the courts, by analysing a unique Irish case of a patient in a state deemed by the courts as 'near PVS'. The paper demonstrates that there is now a legal dichotomy in vegetative patients. However, the manner in which the court treated these patients is the same. Underlying this discussion we hope to demonstrate how medical practice is subject to legal decisions and thus the importance of establishing uniform medical guidelines to assist the non-medical professional.
本文探讨了围绕永久性植物状态（PVS）的当前医学法律问题，包括：“PVS”这一缩略词缺乏统一的定义、PVS的不同诊断标准，以及那些保持最低程度意识且不能归类为PVS患者的问题。首先，我们分析了植物状态下不同的医学定义和诊断标准。我们还通过分析爱尔兰一个独特的案例来探讨“意识”在家庭、医疗团队和法院做出的治疗决策中所起的作用，该案例中的患者被法院认定处于“接近PVS”的状态。本文表明，目前在植物人患者中存在法律上的二分法。然而，法院对待这些患者的方式是相同的。在这一讨论的背后，我们希望展示医疗实践如何受到法律决策的影响，从而说明建立统一医学指南以协助非医学专业人员的重要性。
